Starmer wants to lower the voting age- a good idea ?.

[Richard (OldStager)]

Was somewhat mystified at this suggestion, he claims if you work and pay taxes you should vote. Now whist I think that's a fair and just way to organise the system, his suggestion of 16 year olds being able to vote is ... well a bit odd.

 

I admit I have led a somewhat sheltered life, but aged 16 I was just discovering girls and getting into engines and things, politics was way off my radar back then, and to be honest it really wasn't until I was perhaps 23 or 25 did I actually take notice and understand what all this was about.   

 

Is 16 a good age to be able to vote?, or is this a way to increase the ballot boxes submissions?.

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

No, most certainly not. It isn't a policy based on fairness but on gullibility. Like you Richard, I was discovering girls and their 'charms', building and flying control line model aircraft as a hangover from my earlier years, and generally doing irresponsible things as one does at sixteen. Frankly even eighteen is too young but I wouldn't want to try to make a return to twenty one a viable policy. In the adult population there are many diehard voters for both of the current major parties but luckily for every one drooling at the thought of a Corbyn led government, there's another who has pictures of Margaret Thatcher or Jacob Rees-Mogg on their bedroom walls. For many their political preferences are imbibed with their mother's milk.

To have a vote is a privilege and shouldn't be scattered around among children in exchange for 'lollipops'.

[Richard (OldStager)]

It's not just me then, thank you.

[Stuart]

Someone will have told him most 16-18 year old are labour voters. End of.... 

[jeff oakley]

4 hours ago, Stuart said:

Someone will have told him most 16-18 year old are labour voters. End of.... 

It is statistically true. You only have to look at the university towns where students vote  have over the years changed typically Tory strongholds into Labour and in the case of Bristol Green councils. In some turfing out Tory MP's.

 

16 is too young as they have no life experiance and do not have to pay for their decisions. !8 is about right in my mind.

 

It is a distraction I feel as it takes away the media from actually discussing the real issues and policies they should be doing which are a greater concern

[corsechris]

16 is pretty much peak “mushy brained teenager” territory. Enough life altering mistakes are made at that age without letting them have the power to potentially impact millions with their poor choices. 
 

18 is kind of pushing it for most.

 

A very cynical move though. 

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

Never mind, if the Conservatives have their way the eighteen year olds will all be in the armed services on conscription! It's like a long standing stale soap opera that's run out of plot ideas: "let's have a car crash!" "No, let's have a plane disaster!" A corsechris says, cynical.

[corsechris]

Genuinely interested to hear what those who would be affected think about the national service idea. I don’t know anyone that age so have no sense at all how it would be viewed. Too young to have done it myself so no view from that perspective either.

 

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

I found myself in Tel Aviv some years ago on a business trip. At that time - and now perhaps - all eighteen year olds of both sexes were obliged to do national service. It was somewhat alarming to see beautiful Israeli girls wandering around in army uniform toting rifles! 

[ianali]

If it’s ok to be in our armed forces at 16 then I’d say it’s old enough to vote.

[p k]

In Wales all non general elections have 16 yr olds voting and some elections in Scotland have the same .

[Blatman]

You have to register to vote, right? So if any 16 year olds feel they want to register and vote then fine. Those who don't, won't. 

Giving teenagers an option is not the same as Labour pocketing the vote of every 6th former in the land.

And maybe it should depend. If they are in the armed forces or some other dutiful service (NHS, civil service, charity work) then I say fair enough, let them vote if they so choose. I'm betting many of them will choose not to.

BUT it is interesting that the fear of giving them the vote will somehow alter outcomes. Maybe, but that points to the fact that far too many adults also choose not to vote. If turnout of the "adult" voting population was better, giving 16 year olds the vote really wouldn't matter.

[Captain Colonial]

Saying 16 year-olds shouldn’t vote when there are adults of all ages who don’t or won’t vote rather misses the point.  Voting should be compulsory IF there is an option to put a cross next to a box that says “Abstain” if the voter feels there is no suitable candidate or party, and if there are more votes received for “Abstain” than any candidate, the election should be null and void and all the candidates are barred from running a second time.

 

Or you could just vote for me, running on a platform of benign dictatorship. 👍

[Nick Algar - Competition Secretary]

If your still considered a minor under criminal law until you are 18, then that conflicts with the concept of being able to vote at 16. If you want to change one then both need changing surely ? 

[jeff oakley]

I too would make voting compulsory as I believe it is in Australia. People fought and died to get the vote and yet turnout is always pitiful. 

 

It is even worse for local elections and yet somehow that makes more of a difference to our day to day life than a change in government in many ways.

 

I am proud to say I have never missed a vote I could participate in and yes on some the choices left me cold but at least I did my bit. All parties at the moment are shockingly bad  the worst choices I have ever seen