Should the UK voting age be lowered to 16?

[Matt N]

Hi guys. In recent years, there has been increasing debate surrounding the voting age in the UK. It currently sits at 18, but there are a notable amount of people who think that it should be lowered to 16. The voting age already sits at 16 in certain Welsh and Scottish elections, but the countrywide standard voting age still sits at 18. With that in mind, I'd be really intrigued to know; do you think the voting age should be lowered to 16? Or do you think it's fine at 18? Or would you even support a rise in the voting age?

On the Facebook post that inspired me to do this poll (asking the exact same question), it seemed like commenters were dead against this, with most saying that the voting age should be raised to at least 21; I even heard 25, 30, 40 and 50 thrown around as what the commenters thought the minimum voting age should be. However, I'd be keen to know what you guys think.

Personally, I would (perhaps controversially) support the voting age being lowered to 16. I may be slightly biased seeing as I'm less than a year into being legally able to vote, but when I was 16, I knew a number of people who had very strong political opinions and were very well informed about politics, more so than many adults I know. I think plenty of 16 year olds would make very informed votes and deserve the right to have their voices heard. Heck, when I was 16, my dad even let me vote in the 2019 election on his behalf, because he wasn't interested in it at all and he knew I was interested.

Also, 16 year olds have a number of "adult" rights available to them. At 16, you can get married with parental consent, you can join the armed forces, you can do an apprenticeship with an element of paid work, you could leave school and enter the workforce full-time until a few years ago... if you can do all that, then I don't really see why you can't vote.

I do appreciate why people might want the voting age kept the same or raised, but those are just my thoughts.

But what do you guys think?

 

[pluk]

Its a difficult one. Personally I believe you should be considered adult at 16, not 18, and have full autonomous rights, and be held accountable for your actions in law, at that age. But all the time a 17 year old is considered a child not properly responsible or properly held accountable for the consequences of their actions it doesn't seem right to afford them voting rights. Either you are responsible for important decisions at a given age or you are not.

 

[Matt.GC]

16 year olds aren't what they used to be. At 16, I could go out and get a full time job, get married, have as much sex as I liked (as long as it was heterosexual) and underage drinking was almost like an unwritten law. Yeah, you couldn't do the cool stuff until you were 18 by law, but a blind eye was also turned to many an unsavoury activity back then.

Now, you're practically locked into some form of education until you're 18, have no choice pretty much but to live with mum and dad for financial reasons and practically have to have grey hair before you're served booze because the government decided a couple of decades ago that it was good policy to blame pubs and retailers for all their social problems.

I would 100% say that going back 20 years ago, 16 year olds should have the vote. They paid full income tax, moved out of home earlier and were almost completely seen as adults. Now I'm not so sure. Childhood seems to have been extended significantly by the back door in the 21st century. But as a democrat, I have to say that it's always struck me as backwards that so many adult responsibilities can technically fall on the shoulders of an under 18 (even if the reality is somewhat different) yet they have no democratic right to vote. So with that in mind, I probably do think it's right to let 16 year olds vote.

Not that young people use their vote anyway. They tend to let the odeous kind of people alluded to in the OG post who think the voting age should be 50 to make all their decisions for them. No wonder we have successive governments who's core strategy is to stuff gold in the mouths of over 65's at the expense of the rest of us.

 

[JAperson]

Even though I'm 17 and used to believe I should be able to vote at 16, you know what seeing what's been going on around me I'd say no, and for an extra point I think it should be standardised around the UK, Scots should not be able to vote at 16 while us English cannot. Frankly what I'd say is that if we want 16 to be able to vote in local elections then they should be able to vote in local elections across the whole of the UK. Including hopefully and English assembly at some point (that could be a topic of it's own, in terms of the fact we need to federalise the UK).

 

[Dave]

I don’t think 16 year olds should have the vote, but they also shouldn’t pay any tax and not be allowed to enter the armed services.

You are either considered an adult and get the vote or not, the weird half way house we have is a bit odd.

 

[delta79]

Its a difficult one. Personally I believe you should be considered adult at 16, not 18, and have full autonomous rights, and be held accountable for your actions in law, at that age. But all the time a 17 year old is considered a child not properly responsible or properly held accountable for the consequences of their actions it doesn't seem right to afford them voting rights. Either you are responsible for important decisions at a given age or you are not.

So how does this not full autonomous in law deal with 17yr old drivers?

Sent from my SM-A705FN using Tapatalk

 

[JAperson]

I don’t think 16 year olds should have the vote, but they also shouldn’t pay any tax and not be allowed to enter the armed services.

You are either considered an adult and get the vote or not, the weird half way house we have is a bit odd.

I'd agree with most of this but not the armed services part. I believe that until you are 18 you are not permitted to be sent to any form of war zone but rather you a trained ready, it's effectively an apprenticeships so for me that is acceptable. As you have to be in education until you are 18 there is little for someone who wants to be in the military can do unless they do something else which will then mean they likely won't bother going into the forces.

 

[pluk]

So how does this not full autonomous in law deal with 17yr old drivers?

With the use of appropriate adults and significantly reduced sentences for all but points totting up, as it treats all those between 10 and 17

 

[tayspru]

If the government deems you fit to work and contribute to the economy, you should also be considered fit to vote. Similarly, when the government deems you old enough to stop working, your vote should stop there too - otherwise you’re voting for a future and economy you’re not contributing to and likely won’t see the effects of your decision

 

[rob666]

Come on Marge, do we really want to openly discriminate against the elderly in such a blatant fashion?
The government does not ever tell you when to stop working, full stop.
What about our elders who went to battle in WW2, in the middle east, and the Falklands, to protect your freedom to live as you choose?
Shall we ban the unemployed from voting as well, and add in the disabled who can't work?
Edit...One of my elderly customers, who retired many years ago, pays more in tax per year than I earn in three years.
Shall we cancel his vote as well.
Old gits pay income tax, tax on vehicles, fuel, insurance and VAT, as well as council tax.
Then the family pay a fortune in inheritance tax after they snuff it.
Perhaps we should just kill 'em all off at sixty, save the NHS a bloody fortune.

 

[pluk]

when the government deems you old enough to stop working, your vote should stop there too - otherwise you’re voting for a future and economy you’re not contributing to and likely won’t see the effects of your decision

That's obnoxious.

 

[rob666]

Especially when you think he would support the blue rinse brigade...

 

[tayspru]

Our generations future has been completely tanked by people who won’t be here to see it. An entire generation of people who aren’t technologically or mentally able to fact check what they are told by the papers is a dangerous thing

 

[pluk]

Our generations future has been completely tanked by people who won’t be here to see it. An entire generation of people who aren’t technologically or mentally able to fact check what they are told by the papers is a dangerous thing

If we are in to broadly stereotyping and ageism now I'll join in. So are a bunch of kids who haven't learnt the hard lessons of life yet, but there you go.

 

[rob666]

Are we allowed to use blatant discrimination on here?
If the same argument was against peoples general abilities, gender identity, or colour of skin, it would be banned.
But removing the franchise of one fifth of the population is completely acceptable.
Prejudice in all it's forms is unacceptable isn't it?
Every generation blames the one before, know your history.
Flowery twit.

 

[tayspru]

It’s not discriminatory as such, everyone has access to the internet, the issue is those that believe the first thing they see in print media who lack the interest or ability to carry out a simple fact check. And unfortunately that group almost directly correlates with age. Ideally print media should be put to a stop entirely as evidently they can’t be trusted to print representative factual information, but rather are propaganda presented as fact

 

[jon81uk]

It’s not discriminatory as such, everyone has access to the internet, the issue is those that believe the first thing they see in print media who lack the interest or ability to carry out a simple fact check. And unfortunately that group almost directly correlates with age. Ideally print media should be put to a stop entirely as evidently they can’t be trusted to print representative factual information, but rather are propaganda presented as fact

No the ability to be suckered into the claims printed in newspapers is not directly related to age.
Cogantive ability maybe, but there are plenty of working-age people who beleive everything Murdoch prints.

I understand your general point at the most basic level, but I think linking the right to vote with age doesn't reflect what the population is actually doing, many people are over the legal pension age and still working. Ian Mckellon for example is 83 and still appearing on-stage, should his right to vote be removed?
Teaching people at school how to research and properly understand facts would help, but some people understand things in different ways (hence why not everyone is paid the same, different skills for different pay).

 

[tayspru]

No the ability to be suckered into the claims printed in newspapers is not directly related to age.
Cogantive ability maybe, but there are plenty of working-age people who beleive everything Murdoch prints.

I understand your general point at the most basic level, but I think linking the right to vote with age doesn't reflect what the population is actually doing, many people are over the legal pension age and still working. Ian Mckellon for example is 83 and still appearing on-stage, should his right to vote be removed?
Teaching people at school how to research and properly understand facts would help, but some people understand things in different ways (hence why not everyone is paid the same, different skills for different pay).

To your last point, there’s historically low funding for education that correlates with right wing governments. It’s the first thing they cut, as they gain their power based on people blindly believing their claims without any critical thinking. The last thing any conservative government wants is a generation of people being well educated and able to make critical decisions

 

[rob666]

It’s not discriminatory as such, everyone has access to the internet, the issue is those that believe the first thing they see in print media who lack the interest or ability to carry out a simple fact check. And unfortunately that group almost directly correlates with age. Ideally print media should be put to a stop entirely as evidently they can’t be trusted to print representative factual information, but rather are propaganda presented as fact

Come on mate, we all know what a fountain of truth the internet is.
Not only disenfranchise all the elderly, but abolish the free printed press as well!
What will I wrap the dog turds in at work?
I don't know what you are on, but pass it round as it is far better than what I'm having.

 

[Tibble]

I think you could have a case for 16 year olds to vote, but I think with that the education of politics needs to improve. When I turned 18 I blindly followed what my parents had told me about politics. There was no real education in school about it past the basics.

I think once you hit year 10 there should be a general skills class where they explain politics, tax, mortgages etc. But if you are deemed old enough to pay taxes, you're old enough to have a say in how those taxes are spent