Latest news with #16yearolds
The Guardian
9 hours ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Lowering Australia's voting age to 16 without fortifying civic foundations would be misguided
Every few years, Australia resurrects the idea of lowering the voting age to 16 – usually prompted by a campaign or because some other country (with a fairly different electoral context) is doing so. And every time, we fail to address the question of whether we are prepared as a nation; in my opinion, the answer is no. It's not that I'm philosophically opposed to enfranchising 16‑ and 17‑year‑olds. After all, democracy thrives on fresh voices. The hitch comes when you hand a driving licence to someone who has never sat behind a wheel. Without robust civic and media‑literacy education, and without any clear evidence that 16- and 17-year‑olds themselves demand this change, we'd be giving young Australians an Ikea flat‑pack democracy with no instruction manual. I won't dignify the cognitive capability argument against lowering voting age – sharp minds exist among teens as well of course. But readiness is another matter. Internal efficacy – belief in one's ability to effect change – runs low: in the Australian National University Generation study of 3,131 16- and 17-year-old Australians, just 3.5% backed a lowered compulsory vote, 18% wanted a voluntary ballot and more than 70% favoured keeping the voting age at 18. This mirrored past statistics among older voting youth and the overall voting public – highlighting public reluctance for lowering voting age. This lack of confidence isn't surprising when earlier this year, school students have recorded their lowest civic‑knowledge scores in two decades, and 47% of gen Z voters said their main motivation for casting a ballot in 2022 was avoiding a $20 fine, not civic conviction. Thinking about where they get their information from, social media reigns supreme when it comes to news consumption. Forty per cent of 18-to-24-year‑olds get news on Instagram and 36% on TikTok, yet only 24% of all Australians have had news‑literacy training, according to the 2025 Digital News Report. Given this fragmented media landscape where political misinformation is rife and AI chatbots are increasingly asked to provide tailored news, any notion of voluntary voting – or haphazard enfranchisement – is nonsense unless we first mandate robust civics and media‑literacy education. Independent MP Monique Ryan's proposal of the fallback option of voluntary voting for 16‑ and 17‑year‑olds risks tampering with what ties our young people to the democratic system. If we waive fines for teen no‑shows, we'll replace steady turnout with shrugging indifference (precisely the problem our UK counterparts are trying to solve). In Australia, state-initiated registration and mandatory voting keep our youngest cohorts turning up in significantly higher numbers than in most democracies. In my PhD research across 35 OECD nations, these were the most important electoral design features that drive youth participation, not voting age. Removing them now would be a step backwards, not forwards. Now let's talk party politics. Young voters today are no monolithic bloc but a fractured constellation of issue‑driven minds. Election analyses show 18-to-29-year‑olds are more likely to switch allegiances mid‑campaign and to abandon major parties altogether. Ryan's bid to lower the voting age makes political sense: gen Z are already drifting towards independents and minor parties such as the Greens more than their predecessors, the millennials. So in practice, any voting‑age reform will likely remain a partisan tug‑of‑war rather than a matter of democratic principle. The Greens have been pushing to extend the franchise to 16‑ and 17‑year‑olds, arguing it would amplify youth voices in policymaking (even though enfranchised younger voters today remain poorly represented in policy outcomes than their parents). Labor fears that a younger, more progressive electorate would hand the Greens an entrenched advantage – and that voluntary voting for teens could undermine Australia's compulsory model. The Coalition seems wary that any electoral tweak is likely to advantage the left. Viewed this way, lowering the voting age looks less like principled reform and more like partisan manoeuvring – although injecting a small new cohort is unlikely to upend the broad electoral currents already in motion. Lowering the voting age certainly won't magically bridge the trust gap between young Australians and their representatives. Unless we first diagnose why so many youths distrust politicians, simply adding unprepared 16‑ and 17‑year‑olds to the roll risks token turnout or – under a voluntary scheme – a surge in protest abstention. The solution isn't a standalone ballot‑box fix but a two‑pronged approach (while maintaining compulsory voting): first we must invest in compulsory civics, media and digital‑literacy education across our secondary schools, and only then can we negotiate lowering voting age. Perhaps the moment is ripe to roll out these reforms in tandem. I'll leave it to Ryan, the Greens and the ALP to whatever mix of electoral legacy‑building or genuine youth advocacy they pursue – but I remain unconvinced that enfranchising new voters without fortifying their civic foundations is anything but misguided, if not downright harmful. Dr Intifar Chowdhury is a youth researcher and a lecturer in government at Flinders University
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
DAN HODGES: Keir Starmer's delusional if he thinks his morally bankrupt plan to let 16-year-olds vote will help him out. They'll NEVER vote for him
It goes without saying that the Government's move to hand the vote to 16-year-olds is intellectually and morally bankrupt. You can determine the legal speed limit. But you aren't actually deemed mature enough to get behind the wheel yourself. You can endorse sending British troops off to fight in a foreign war. But you're not perceived to have sufficient discipline or self-control to join them. You can't be trusted to buy alcohol, get married or own a credit card. But you can help determine the political direction of Britain for half a decade. To be fair, nobody ever seriously pretended there was some great civic imperative behind the change. Angela Rayner made a half-decent fist of it when she claimed: '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.'
Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Times
Angela Rayner: We're giving young people a stake in the future
Nobody expected much of me when I become a young mum at 16. I was suddenly faced with serious responsibilities for putting food on the table, paying my bills and giving my son Ryan the best possible start in life. With support, I rose to the challenge. I got a job, I paid taxes, I supported my son. But my story isn't unique. There are many other 16-year-olds across this country who are working hard every day, paying their taxes, caring for relatives and contributing to our society. By law, they can get married and serve our country in the armed forces — but, unlike their peers in Scotland and Wales, 16-year-olds in England and Northern Ireland can't vote. Why not? Unlike our opponents, this Labour government is not running scared of a generation that's hungry for change. That's why we are giving all of the roughly 1.6 million 16 and 17-year-olds who are eligible the right to have their say at the ballot box for the first time. This is about fairness and transparency and giving the young a stake in our country's future, bringing them into our communities, not excluding them. It's about delivering on our manifesto to commitment to secure votes at 16. But it's also about strengthening our electoral system so that it is fit for the 21st century — because we cannot take our democracy for granted. We face growing threats to our freedoms at home and abroad and it is too easy for malign actors to meddle in our electoral system. Dodgy shell companies owned by anyone, funded from anywhere, and without even a single day of trading, are allowed to finance our political parties. This is while individual people must be on the electoral register to donate. This is a dangerous loophole that's clearly unfair and open to abuse. It must change. At the same time, we are making those receiving political donations responsible for checking that there is no foreign interference involved in the money they are offered. We're also giving the Electoral Commission powers to fine those who break the rules up to £500,000. • 16-year-olds can vote in next UK general election We have a collective responsibility to keep our democracy and those who represent us safe. The shocking abuse and intimidation we witnessed during last year's general election shows the scale of the challenges we face. Candidates from across the political spectrum faced appalling treatment, including death threats, and women and ethnic minorities suffered the most. Among those targeted were my friend and colleague, Rushanara Ali, our brave and brilliant minister for homelessness and democracy. Quite apart from the terrible toll on individuals, this victimisation is likely to deter many good people from standing for public office and deprive our country of their contribution. It's an attack on our freedoms and our way of life — and we won't stand for it. So, we're introducing tougher sentences for those responsible for threatening behaviour and removing requirements for candidates' addresses to be published. We are also taking steps to boost participation by removing barriers to make it easier and safer for people to cast their vote. Changes made by the last government went too far by effectively excluding those who didn't have access to the right documentation. This Labour government is committed to removing barriers to democracy while keeping safeguards in place so that more legitimate voters can have their say at the ballot box. That's why we are allowing the use of UK-issued bank cards as ID at polling stations for the first time, building on last year's change to add the HM Armed Forces Veteran Card to the list of accepted ID. These are common-sense reforms to get our democracy back on track in changing times and ensure that everyone has a say in its future. This should include younger generations who have been failed for too long by 14 years of chaos, neglect and decline. In stark contrast to those who oppose these plans, this Labour government has something to offer them. The biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation, our mission to Make Work Pay, including thousands of young people getting a big raise in April following increases in the national minimum wage and living wage, a fairer deal for people renting and much more. This is our Plan for Change in action, a plan to grow the economy, put more money in people's pockets and unleash opportunity. This is democracy in action, led by a government that is building a country that works for all.
