Forum menu
OK, I'll start it, as my FB has lit up. From my point of view, it creates more issues with other age related restrictions that should or maybe should not be brought into line, but I'm not opposed to the idea.
BBC News - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c93kkg37n3kt
16 and 17-year-olds to be able to vote in next general election - live updates - BBC News
Our (almost 18) daughter would be eligible net time round anyway, she has sufficient about her to make a reasoned judgement to suit her moral and social ideals.
Our younger son can’t even be relied on to get dressed for school or survive if the internet drops out for more than 15 seconds. Let alone reason with himself to cast a vote.
Let alone reason with himself to cast a vote.
To be fair that applies to a large % of the voting population regardless of age......just look at how many votes reform got last time for evidence!
Sounds like a good idea...like the rest of the voting population there will be plenty with a decent idea and plenty without any clue...and plenty more without the ability to research and just follow the loudest voice in whatever sphere of influence they have.
I think it is a good idea as once the winning party are in power, then when the youths become adults their vote will be helping decide who is in power.
About bloody time.
About bloody time.
Why? Not legally adults. And another reason for not doing this is because it's been done to potentially change the outcome of the next general election by skewing the vote, something that may well backfire on the current government because some of the largest gains by the far right parties have been from the young.
Seems that Starmer is doing everything he can to hand the next election to Farage and his sidekicks.
Good news.
I don't have a problem with kids who have difficulty dressing themselves voting. That's better than a relative who needed dressing, had trouble finishing a sentence and didn't know what happened yesterday postal voting.
I think if you're old enough to work and perhaps more importantly, made to pay tax on said earnings, you should get a say.
How it may or may not pan out is another subject entirely.
To be fair that applies to a large % of the voting population regardless of age......just look at how many votes reform got last time for evidence!
You mean that people shouldn't be allowed a vote if they don't agree with your voting habits?
I say let em vote, by christ the they're the most likely to be affected by which ever way the political wind blows and depending on when their birthday might fall could be as old as 23yo before they can vote in a GE otherwise.
my initial [knee jerk] reaction is "that's too young"* - runs the risk of elections being even more decided by social media than they currently are.
What's the reasoning behind it?
* I may well be wrong.
You mean that people shouldn't be allowed a vote if they don't agree with your voting habits?
In an ideal world yes. But failing that I'll take the next best option and increase the number of people allowed to vote as much as possible.
You can't lose your vote no matter how far your mental facilities decline (assuming they were there in the first place). Therefore age shouldn't be a barrier at the other end of the scale either.
I'd let anyone who can fill in the voting form do it.
Having taught plenty of 16 & 17 year olds, yes they can be helpless and easily distracted, but as said above they are the ones with most to gain or lose from the outcome of the election.
I'd also trust the judgement of a 16 year old compared to someone who never leaves their nursing home, watches GB news and has a postal vote at the other end of the spectrum
my initial [knee jerk] reaction is "that's too young"* - runs the risk of elections being even more decided by social media than they currently are.
What's the reasoning behind it?
* I may well be wrong.
Also my knee jerk reaction, as a parent of two very capable young adults who could have reasoned a decision at 16.
But thinking about it, if the borderline capable (in terms of capacity, not just Reform voters) get to vote, why not 16 and 17 year olds? If they earn enough they'd pay tax.
It does raise a host of other issues though - old enough to vote but not old enough to buy alcohol or a lottery ticket. Get married. Can vote but not be sent to war. Or an adult prison. Or be named in legal proceedings. It does open up a host of questions around the age of majority on wider issues.
Fwiw, other bits are included in the proposals, including foreign donors to parties, but doesn't really go far enough.
It is fun watching Reform supporters on social media claiming this is Labour taking advantage of left wing indoctrination in schools and ignoring all the reports of the growth of the right among the young (especially young males)
Most of us aren't really adults 'till our mid twenties. Having different thresholds of rights, responsibilities and protections at different ages really isn't that problematic. I'd happily have another tier of driving licence (and additional test) for more powerful cars with a higher age threshold, for example. 21 perhaps? And have "kids" at 17 limited to lower powered cars. In a similar way, I've no problem with the age threshold for being able to buy addictive harmful drugs going up, while the age you can vote comes down in England... there is no real reason why they need be the same... one is about allowing youngsters to take part in democracy, the other is about improving health outcomes.
I have said it numerous times on here before. I like to use the Daily Mail Barometer. A quick glance at their comments section indicates that, as usual, their readers are furious about this. I therefore deduce that it is an excellent thing.
we’ve had 16 year olds voting here in Scotland for years now. It hasn’t resulted in any seismic shift, I think being kids engaged in politics younger is a good thing so I’m all for it.
For me the biggest advantage is that they will get their first voting experience when at school (assuming they will get a local election vote if they miss out on a GE vote at that age). There will be the GB News/ Reform nut jobs that will claim they will be indoctrinated by lefty staff and what schools do with them would have to be very transparent that it's neutral - but I would make a case that by compulsion of the fact that young adults that age are still in some form of education and would have to attend some form of voter preparation classes that they could be the best informed cohort of voters in the UK. Most other (left or right leaning) older voters will mostly only be exposed to confirmation bias material and rarely could give you an informed, considered and accurate explanations of their voting intention. We 'could', if we do it right, start their voting and democracy journey well and change behaviour long term.
It obviously is already happening in Scotland with significant, meaningful elections already.
More broadly, I vacillate massively from thinking the vast majority of the voting public are ignorant fools who have no place having an impact on our future decisions to wanting compulsory voting for all like Australia.
For me it's pretty clear cut, if the state expects to be able to tax you when you get a job at 16 you should be able to vote at 16.
Also, considering the vast swathes of ****less, disengaged or disorganised adults that can't be bothered get it together enough to vote I suspect strongly that there will be a big element of self-selection amongst the 16 and 17 years old who do turn out.
For me the biggest advantage is that they will get their first voting experience when at school
On one hand it opens the opportunity to engage them in stuff like fact checking and critical thinking, but it does place a significant responsibly on the teachers to keep things balanced. Exposing people to different views from whatever "the algorithm" decides they should see has to be a good thing and school is an ideal place for that to happen if it can be well supported.
Both my daughters had more political knowledge and better critical thinking at 16 than a lot of the morons who voted for Brexit and are now voting for Reform
I’d say most 16 year olds are more likely to recognise a load of made up bullshit on social media than your average boomer
Why? Not legally adults.
But at 16 you can leave the parental home, ride a moped (and drive a car at 17), buy a lottery ticket (but not gamble – ehh), give consent for sexual intercourse etc. Although, conversely, the Government increased the age at which a person can get married to 18 just a couple of years ago (likewise with increasing the legal smoking age from 16 whenever that was). I just don't think it is a clear-cut area and, at the end of the day, voting in an election at 16 carries a far lower risk to the individual than, say, buying three bottles of vodka to drink down the park.
I’d say most 16 year olds are more likely to recognise a load of made up bullshit on social media than your average boomer
Hmmm, as a dad to two 16 yr olds (who are both very mature and sensible), I am not entirely sure that is always the case.
Not sure why some in the media are getting in a tiz - there's only 1.5m of them spread over every UK constituency. It'll barely make a blip on the final results, but may actually get some of them involved in how things are run.
...you never know of of them could be running a local council at 18! 🤣
Why not, the argument over capability to understand what they are voting for doesn't apply to the rest of our population. Personally I'd like to see some threshold for being allowed to vote (not exactly democratic I know) but if 16 year olds can demonstrate they are capable crack on. Politics is bust in Western democracies, years of politicians of all hues telling the voters they can have what they want without consequences followed by failing to deliver has resulted in the mess we are in now, the population are like petulant teenagers who throw a tantrum when they can't have what they want.
I think it's a decent idea. They are going to have more to loose by poor environmental decisions than pensioners.
Just slightly bothered by how you I D them.
Inspire of me paying tax, drawing a state pension. I was apparently unidentifiable for a postal vote. I had to provide photos of a driving license or a passport (don't have one) or photos of three utility bills, most of ours are on line.
These young voters may not be eligible for a driving license, might not have a passport and probably no utility bill, tax or Ni.
Just slightly bothered by how you I D them.
That's the next stage!
A National ID Card scheme from 16 where they take your DNA, retina and face scan and micro-chip you! 😀😬
Just slightly bothered by how you I D them
You get an NI Number at 16
There was talk of allowing bank card as ID - a small step in undoing some of the damage the Tories have done to stop people who are likely to vote against them, along with the changing boundries etc...
This can only be a good idea.
the only problem is that the kind of people who are actually going to bother to vote at 16 fall into 2 categories
people that care fare too much about politics
or radicalised young andrew tate fans that are going to vote Reform coz the feminarchy are neutering them
all that said at 16 you can join the army, get married, pay taxes etc etc
you should be able to vote
I once had 80 yr old in the shop who floated the idea that if the under 18's were too lacking in life experience and too naive, then maybe the over 80's were too cynical, jaded and some not quite on top form.
OK, I'll start it, as my FB has lit up. From my point of view, it creates more issues with other age related restrictions that should or maybe should not be brought into line, but I'm not opposed to the idea.
I don't think it does.
Or if it does, then pensioners should be denied a vote as the government sets their pension, just as 16 year olds should be denied the vote because the government says they cant buy cigarettes.
We all vote for governments that ultimately ban us (or others) from doing lots of things.
Just slightly bothered by how you I D them.
I'm sure that was on the BBC site recently, and compared to previous times that it has been floated as an idea most people are now in favor (or at least don't care) across the spectrum.
Reform voters think it'll crack down on immigration
Young people have grown up with the idea that the internet already knows everything about them, so why is the government having a single ID for their NI, benefits, health, driving license, and fishing rod license really a problem?
etc ....
This news has really brightened my day. It was a joy to watch the right wing extremists on GB news totally lose their shite over this.
all that said at 16... get married
You cannot get married until 18
Marriage has been 18 since 2023. Military recruitment is an odd one, basically you can be trained but not in service ‘till 18. But… so? Why should you not be able to vote before you can get married, or fight for your country? Those limits are to protect young people… why do they need protection from being included in the democratic process?
Just slightly bothered by how you I D them
They'd be the awkward, spotty ones
At least its dipping a toe in voting reform (not Reform), could open a path to PR or similar, at least these things are being considered. Whiff of dead cat though.
It's 40 years old but The Young Ones had a point...
https://www.tiktok.com/@dmc_macky/video/7251077581380816155
Military recruitment is an odd one, basically you can be trained but not in service ‘till 18
A bit like the meat trade. You can start your apprenticeship at 16, but you are not allowed to enter the main floor of an abattoir until you are 18
On balance, I think this is a good thing. Swayed by them having to deal with more consequences than those at the other end.
I've no standout concerns about them being about to make reasoned choices, well, no more than I have about those over 18 as well.
I'm going on a mooch around some corners of the internet that consider GB News a balanced an honest place to catch up on current affairs....
I think if you're old enough to work and perhaps more importantly, made to pay tax on said earnings, you should get a say.
No taxation without representation as the saying goes.
It sort of has to be one thing or the other - no vote? then it should follow that theres no liability for tax. If you're liable for tax then you've as much right to say on how money is spent as anyone else
we’ve had 16 year olds voting here in Scotland for years now.
You can actually submit your registration when your 14 if you're really keen
Interestingly voter turnout in Scotland seems to be higher amongst 16/17 year olds than it is for 18-25 year olds.
It's all a bit of storm in a teacup really because as a portion of the voting public ranging in age from 16-106 people aged 16-17 is hardly anyone - exactly how much do we imagine that group will shift the dial in any given election. And as often as not people aged 16/17 in a given year won't have any elections scheduled to actually vote in