16 year olds to be able to vote in next general election
Plans announced today, Thursday, July 17, are to increase participation in elections.
Further plans proposed to introduce automated voter registration, which is already used in Australia and Canada, and to make UK-issued bank cards an accepted form of ID at polling stations.
'It's really important that 16 and 17 year olds have the vote'@Keir_Starmer tells ITV News Westminster Reporter @DennyTheJourno that he will lower the voting age to 16 by the next general election https://t.co/tSdDe4UWeE pic.twitter.com/oFbWmdC9mw
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said 'far too many people' had been put off voting by the voter ID rules introduced by the previous government, with the Electoral Commission finding around 750,000 people did not vote due to a lack of ID.
The Government has already made the Veteran Card an accepted form of voter ID, and intends to allow digital forms of ID to be used when they become available.
Recommended reading:
Parents warned shops are legally selling addictive nicotine pouches to children
Keir Starmer suspends 3 Labour MPs amid breaches in party discipline
New research reveals British women are 'running on empty' amid life pressures
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said: 'For too long public trust in our democracy has been damaged and faith in our institutions has been allowed to decline.
'We are taking action to break down barriers to participation that will ensure more people have the opportunity to engage in UK democracy, supporting our plan for change, and delivering on our manifesto commitment to give 16-year-olds the right to vote.'
The change in the voting age will mark the biggest change to the electorate since it was reduced from 21 years old to 18 in 1969.
The last general election took place on July 4, 2024. At the time of writing, the exact date of the next general election has not yet been confirmed.
Another general election could take place if the Prime Minister called a snap election.
In the past, snap elections have been called by a PM following a vote of no confidence.
But, it must take place no later than 15 August 2029.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
21 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Cenotaph wreath rules were changed to placate unionists, Blair-era files show
Tony Blair's government altered the rules on party leaders laying wreaths at the Cenotaph to keep unionists onboard with Northern Ireland's peace process, newly released files show. The decision was taken in the run-up to the Remembrance Sunday ceremony in 2004 to change rules drawn up in 1984 that meant leaders of parties who won at least six seats at the previous general election could lay a wreath. The old rules meant that David Trimble, whose Ulster Unionist party (UUP) had won six seats in 2001, could take part, while his rival Ian Paisley could not, after his Democratic Unionist party (DUP) won five seats. However, when Jeffrey Donaldson defected from the UUP to the DUP in 2003, the balance was reversed, and the Democratic Unionists complained they were being treated unfairly. Papers released by the National Archives show that the then Northern Ireland secretary, Paul Murphy, wrote to colleagues in government: 'We will undoubtedly face renewed pressure from the the DUP this year given that they are now not only the largest NI party but also have six Westminster MPs (and had done resoundingly well in the assembly and Euro elections).' 'But we are now involved in intensive dialogue over the political future in Northern Ireland in which the DUP, and the UUP, are the key players,' he added in a memo to which Blair was copied in. 'I fear, therefore, there are now pressing political reasons for amending the 1984 formulation.' Charlie Falconer, then the constitutional affairs secretary, expressed concern, saying there could be an 'adverse reaction' from Scottish and Welsh nationalist parties to the prospect of two wreaths being laid by Northern Irish parties while they were limited to laying a joint wreath. Paisley went on to lay a wreath at the Cenotaph for the first time, a reflection of the DUP's status as the largest party in Northern Ireland at that point, with Trimble also taking part. Other files reveal how Blair's chief of staff had urged him privately to convince 'securocrats' in the British state of the need to be brave and swiftly tear down watchtowers and armoured bases as part of a move to get the IRA onboard as the peace process hung in the balance. 'As always we have no plan B,' Jonathan Powell wrote to Blair in December 2002 at a time when he judged the situation to be 'pretty grim' after the first collapse of Northern Ireland's power-sharing executive, loyalist paramilitary violence and attempts to get the IRA to demobilise. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion But the files also illustrate the high-stakes balancing act the Blair administration was engaged in amid negotiations with Irish republicans and handling pushback from Britain's security services. 'The only way to get the IRA onboard is to go for full normalisation in one go. It is probably also the safest way to do it – we need to make republicans responsible for the safety of police in places like south Armagh with a warning we will reverse the steps if they are harmed. And that can only be done if we go the whole way,' wrote Powell. 'The securocrats will tell you that all we can do is take a few minor steps, that the threat from dissidents remains etc. You will need to convince them when you see them in the first week back that they have to draw up a plan to go straight to pulling down all towers, pulling down armoured police stations etc. This will require real bravery on their part.'
BBC News
21 minutes ago
- BBC News
Targets of new people smuggling sanctions to be announced
Gang leaders, corrupt officials and companies selling small boat equipment will be named this week as the first targets of new government sanctions against financial action - which the government says is a world-first - is aimed at tackling illegal immigration to the UK and is central to Sir Keir Starmer's plan to disrupt the English Channel crossings by "smashing the gangs" that are organising sanctions strategy was first unveiled in January but the government has now indicated that it is ready to announce on Wednesday the dozens of people who will have their assets frozen, and will be banned from entering the UK and engaging with its financial Secretary David Lammy said: "For too long, criminal gangs have been lining their corrupt pockets and preying on the hopes of vulnerable people with impunity as they drive irregular migration to the UK." People targeted by the sanctions include those who supply fake documents and finance small boats, as well as "middlemen" who push money through Hawala networks, an informal system for organising money transfers often used by Minister Sir Keir Starmer is under growing pressure to stem the flow of migrants reaching the UK, after pledging to "smash" people-smuggling gangs ever since the general election campaign a year this month, he signed a "one in, one out" deal with France to return migrants to France for the equivalent number of legal asylum seekers, subject to security checks. In the first six months of this year, more than 20,000 people crossed in small boats, an increase of nearly 50% on the previous year, according to Home Office Monday, shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the number of people entering the UK illegally was causing a "public safety crisis" for women and girls."The truth is you don't stop the Channel crossings by freezing a few bank accounts in Baghdad or slapping a travel ban on a dinghy dealer in Damascus," Philp said in a on Monday, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said that people protesting outside a hotel used to house asylum seekers in Essex were "genuinely concerned families". Bottles and flares were thrown towards police during the demonstration, which Downing Street condemned."I don't think anybody in London even understands just how close we are to civil disobedience on a vast scale in this country," Farage said in a speech on Monday. The government says that the new sanctions will target immigration crime gangs "where traditional law enforcement and criminal justice approaches cannot reach". Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, said the new sanctions regime is a "decisive step in our fight against the criminal gangs who profit from human misery"."It will allow us to target the assets and operations of people-smugglers wherever they operate, cutting off their funding and dismantling their networks piece by piece," she said.
The National
43 minutes ago
- The National
No referendum is coming. Let's drop the ‘Yes' and refocus
This involved repeating a number of key points that some in the independence movement have been making over a period of years, and as such was critical in tone. Fair enough. Reading again, though, it admittedly feels jaded and cyclical in nature. The words offered no real direction forward, some argued, and that in a sense is true. But more than that, the conversation as a whole is trapped and stale. The SNP say this predictable thing, and people like me in different parts of the movement respond in the usual manner. READ MORE: SNP members call for 'reparative action' after Israel 'critical friend' comment To be brutally honest, despite campaigning hard for a Yes vote in 2014, the experience of the national question since has been far from inspirational, to the extent that I have come to reconsider the whole thing. After all, we have all witnessed the way in which it has been utilised by the SNP for their own ends. Perhaps most tellingly, the dominant position they had achieved in Scottish politics never translated to the programme of reform that would really have transformed the lives of working-class Scots, albeit within the boundaries of devolution. While the cause of independence, frankly speaking, hit the rocks. So here are some ideas for how we might take the discussion forward. Apart from anything else, a revitalisation of the debate around Scotland's national ambitions and prospects has merit in and of itself. Especially in a world order which is undergoing the most fundamental restructuring since the Second World War era. Face the hard truths First, we need to register some difficult truths. We need a clearing house in which to put all of the problems which have built up over the past 10 years and to accept certain realities. There is not going to be a referendum on the issue any time soon, for lots of reasons which require more space to fully explore. But let's just for the moment agree that it is off the agenda. The independence 'movement' is a shadow of its former self. It never really managed to maintain the verve, diversity and irreverence of its referendum form. The programmatic work is a mess in key areas, especially on currency. It's very simple: no independent central bank, means no economic control. And without economic power, a country cannot be independent. To add insult to injury, much of the industrial base required to set up a new state has already been sold off to foreign capital and multinational corporations. Time has been wasted. We have had years in which to make a credible and popular case to raise support. Despite the shock of Brexit, much too central to the SNP's case, the dial has not shifted. More could be added to this short list. But once we have accepted the above, we can start to intellectually rejuvenate things. And I would start with this, and not with activism. No door-knocking to be done There is no door-knocking to be done, and no community outreach to be had. Instead, this has to be a period of ideas. It is not impossible to make the independence question the gravitational pole for the most interesting and dynamic political thinking available. This involves opening big debates about Scotland's role in the world, and about its economic future. We should be producing more theorists, writers and speakers building on the best radical traditions we have. Working with people with different views For this to happen, we would need to escape the bandwidth as proscribed by the [[SNP]] on the one hand, and the main Westminster parties on the other to rebuild and rethink the foundations and principles of the project as a whole. To make them fit for the world as it is today. And, crucially, this can be done alongside working with people with different views on the constitution on a range of issues, from Gaza to campaigns for public ownership or housing. By encouraging such an exchange of perspectives, the core of the independence movement might reconsolidate. At present, it does not exist in any meaningful or political form. And here, you cannot avoid politics. The British state is becoming more authoritarian, so the response has to be to uphold civil liberties. Privatisation has failed, so the response has to be rooted in bringing our resources into democratic control. The UK Government has been arming a genocide, so the response must be to advocate for an entirely new foreign policy based on peace and justice. Only once the base achieves ideological coherence can there be a serious campaign which aims to reach out to wider sections of society. READ MORE: Media Watch: When political cartoons take it too far The SNP will not pursue such a strategy, as they are bound by electioneering, and prefer to make a broad appeal. But breadth without depth does not build or sustain a wider movement. Of course, within this there will be disagreement – and that is to be welcomed. But we should be forward thinking. 'Yes' needs jettisoned. It only makes any sense if you were around in 2014. The technocratic approach extolled by indy-officialdom is here to stay. So this means we need a multi-dimensional critique which includes the Scottish establishment. Whatever happens, Scotland cannot remain in this rut of zombie-government, with Reform as the only outrider, combined with a reheated 'push' for independence without substance whenever the SNP require it. We need a total reset as far as pro-independence thought is concerned to open new avenues and possibilities. At the very least, it will take us past the current malaise. That would be good for Scottish politics in its totality.
