logo
#

Latest news with #votes

Votes for 16-year-olds won't improve politics
Votes for 16-year-olds won't improve politics

Telegraph

time17-07-2025

  • Politics
  • Telegraph

Votes for 16-year-olds won't improve politics

Extending votes to 16-year-olds at all UK elections must be one of the most short-sighted and desperate measures ever to be brought before Parliament. It is not as if the country were so well governed that we could afford the risk. Yet the Labour Government is embarking on the dangerous experiment of handing power to teenagers who for almost all other purposes are deemed by the law to be children. Worse: like almost all constitutional changes, this one is likely to be irreversible. Perhaps we should not be surprised that a Prime Minister who until recently seemed confused about the biology of sex should also be in a muddle about the physiology of adolescents. It is true that at 16 one may well be physically able to serve one's country, often with conspicuous courage. A handful of prodigies can astonish us with their talents, too. Yet it is no less a fact that the brain continues to develop well into one's twenties. Children of 16 are generally less capable of thinking ahead or of assessing danger than adults. Sir Keir Starmer is untroubled by such realities. For him, apparently, the only relevant criterion is that 16-year-olds may pay taxes. But it does not follow from this that they should be entitled to vote. Otherwise, by the same logic the millions of people who do not pay taxes would lose the vote. Children are represented by their parents in many fields until they reach adulthood. They also require protection: one reason why the age of consent for marriage has been raised to 18 (not that Angela Rayner had noticed). However precocious, a voter of 16 lacks the experience to detect the fools, frauds and fanatics who are unfortunately ubiquitous in politics. No doubt Labour expects that this act of constitutional tomfoolery will favour the party, because young people are assumed to lean to the Left. But this gimmick is no great cause célèbre. Unlike women in the early 20th century, who fought hard for the suffrage, fewer than half of the Welsh 16 and 17-year-olds invited to vote for the Senedd could even be bothered to register. It is no accident that few other countries have lowered their voting age below 18. In Austria, which did so in 2007, the effect has been polarising: the younger the voters, the more attracted they are to extremes, especially on the Right. The beneficiaries have not been the older centrist parties, but the anti-immigration nationalists of the Freedom Party. Here, too, Sir Keir may well find himself hoist by his own petard. What if the newly enfranchised boys and girls reject his bribery and cast their ballots for Kemi Badenoch or Nigel Farage?

Labour's cynical and foolish move to give the vote to 16-year-olds will backfire. This is why... and who will actually benefit: STEPHEN GLOVER
Labour's cynical and foolish move to give the vote to 16-year-olds will backfire. This is why... and who will actually benefit: STEPHEN GLOVER

Daily Mail​

time17-07-2025

  • Politics
  • Daily Mail​

Labour's cynical and foolish move to give the vote to 16-year-olds will backfire. This is why... and who will actually benefit: STEPHEN GLOVER

Picture the scene in No 10. The mood is gloomy. The Prime Minister's personal ratings are plumbing new lows. Labour is limping behind Reform UK in every poll. So what can Starmer do? There is a lot of head scratching. Then someone – perhaps it is the master strategist Sir Keir himself – has a brainwave. Why not dust off Labour's 2024 manifesto pledge to give votes to 16 and 17-year-olds?

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store