Keir Starmer keen to give 16 year olds VOTE if Labour win

Do you really think giving children the vote is a good idea, we regard them as children until they are 18 when they are fully responsible. Thats the time to think about serious adult topics like politics.

Rosie51

If 16 year olds are informed/old enough to influence the government of the country by being given the vote, then I assume they will also be granted all the other privileges/obligations afforded to adults? So no more "they're only kids" when it comes to judicial sentencing, obtaining a licence to drive a car, they'll be able to leave the education system at 16 with no obligation to be in an apprenticeship like scheme, sign legally binding contracts, marry without parental consent in England and Wales, buy cigarettes and alcohol, watch any content in films etc, ad infinitum. If not, why not? Either they're fully adult or they're not. Giving your vote to the party that will enact policy for all your fellow citizens is a huge responsibility. If you're equipped for that by virtue of being 16 then you're equipped for the rest.

I totally agree with you Rosie. For me, the age of majority would be better set at 18, but if the powers that be decide that 16 is a fully mature adult, then all that comes with being an adult must come with it.
I’m afraid it can’t be one way when it suits, but the other way when it doesn’t suit!

Ridiculous idea.

It led to increased engagement with politics which ha a long term effect. I'll see if I can get the link for the research

How is voting at 16 working in Scotland?

I don’t read any horror stories, or uprising against it.

I doubt many people would change their vote to stop 16 year olds getting a vote Molly. I am not in favour but I don’t feel more strongly about it than about social fairness and reducing poverty for instance.
That’s not what I meant.
No one knows how all 16 year olds would vote.
I simply meant that more folk would actually get up and vote rather than leave the decision of who gets into power to 16 year olds.
My DH reckons it could be KS courting the Labour vote in Scotland. A bit of sweet talk about how they got it right and he’s thinking of following their example.
Compulsory voting hasn’t been mooted as far as I know. It was just a suggestion of what might come up next.

I don’t think compulsory voting is being mooted, is it?

The day voting is made compulsory will be the last time I vote.

In a democraric society every voter must have the option of not voting at all without having to fear being penalised in any way.

biglouis

I would put the age of consent back to 20/21.

Do you mean the age of consent or the age of majority?

I think disallowing sex before 21 is pointless. It is going against Nature and legislating against Nature never ends well. If you mean the age of majority then maybe - I wouldn’t vote for that personally, but wonder whether voting should be conditional on passing some sort of political awareness test would be a good idea. As paddyanne says though, there are people of all ages who would use that as an excuse not to vote, and I would be concerned that the test could be manipulated to disenfranchise people.

I doubt many people would change their vote to stop 16 year olds getting a vote Molly. I am not in favour but I don’t feel more strongly about it than about social fairness and reducing poverty for instance.

If he can create voting at 16, why not make it compulsory at the same time?
Do I think the majority of 16 year olds are mature enough? No.
Rosie51 makes some excellent points about what else we could expect them to accept responsibility for, besides voting.
It might also spur some of those older than 16, who don’t usually bother to vote, but who disagree with the vote at 16 -maybe to vote against the party who would bring that in. Speculation, speculation . . .

You can marry without parental consent in Scotland at 16...I know couples who left school o the friday and got married on the Saturday ..and they're still married 40 years on .
I also know many adults who "dont do politics,because its boring" .Maybe they're the ones we should pull the plug on voting ,after all its the 16 year olds who will inherit the mess that WE'VE made over centuries .3 of my GC have been able to vote since they were 16 and all are quite capable of making decisions .as have their friends.Maybe we're just a more political nation.A few years ag a european poll showed Scots as the most politically aware from a young age ,the longer you TREAT them as kids the longer they'll act as kids

There's a fair amount of research on the issue, Scottish 16+ year olds first voted in 2014. Research indicates early engagement promotes long term participation.
www.sps.ed.ac.uk/news-events/news/lowering-voting-age-boosts-long-term-participation-elections

I would put the age of consent back to 20/21.

I think you've put it better than me Doodledog. Yes some 16 year olds are incredibly mature, but the vast majority are not, and I think decisions have to be made on the average. If we constantly excuse 15/16/17 year olds and beyond for their behaviour on the grounds of being immature/children then why would we consider them eligible (as a class) for a vote on who governs us?

I don’t think that comparing them to women, to working class men, or to those who are legally adults is useful at all. We need to decide based on the state of being 16 in 2024, not how that compares to historical groups of people. 16 year olds have, on average, nine years before their brains develop to adulthood. Yes, some of them are remarkably sensible, and yes, they are a very disparate group, but on the whole IMO they are children and children should not be able to vote. It’s not a hill I would die on, but I do think it’s too young.

If 16 year olds are informed/old enough to influence the government of the country by being given the vote, then I assume they will also be granted all the other privileges/obligations afforded to adults? So no more "they're only kids" when it comes to judicial sentencing, obtaining a licence to drive a car, they'll be able to leave the education system at 16 with no obligation to be in an apprenticeship like scheme, sign legally binding contracts, marry without parental consent in England and Wales, buy cigarettes and alcohol, watch any content in films etc, ad infinitum. If not, why not? Either they're fully adult or they're not. Giving your vote to the party that will enact policy for all your fellow citizens is a huge responsibility. If you're equipped for that by virtue of being 16 then you're equipped for the rest.

I think the increase would be marginal. Just as likely not to get out of bed to vote like 20.30, 40 year olds.

It's not a flagship policy, Starmer was just asked about it today by a reporter. I tend to agree with Casdon.

How can speaking of perhaps giving 16. Year olds the vote give more votes to Labour now ? Starmer said ‘they could’. not
they will

To be honest, I think that everything should be rounded up to 18. Driving, marriage, voting, joining the military, smoking. The only thing I would keep at 16 is sex. Young people will have sex whatever the law is, and I don’t think that should be criminalised. They could live together, but 16 is too young to make a mature decision about marriage.

Incidentally we are told that the human brain is not fully mature until the age of 25. I wouldn’t suggest that 25 was the age of majority, but it’s worth considering the implications of that piece of information.

I don't agree with voting at sixteen.
It's too young.
It's a cynical ploy to get more votes.
Just when I was considering possibly, only possibly, voting Labour.... I'm even more unsure now.

Doodledog

I don’t see what’s funny about it. I agree that 16 year olds would feel patronised- my 16 year old self would definitely have done so - but as with so many false equivalences this one doesn’t stand up. Unless you see women and the working classes as immature, that is.

I guess that depends on the extent to which you think maturity and wisdom is linked to age - and your experience of 16 and 17 year olds. The argument made against working men, then women under 30 was very similar, as Glorianny said. How would we feel if it was decided that the maximum age at which we could vote was, say, 75, because after that we became too set in our ways and our intellectual capacity started, on average to reduce (before anybody shoots me, this is just an example, not what I think).

We could just as easily say that throughout history we have been terrible at safeguarding children.

I agree, that why the same mistakes are repeated again and again.

I don’t see what’s funny about it. I agree that 16 year olds would feel patronised- my 16 year old self would definitely have done so - but as with so many false equivalences this one doesn’t stand up. Unless you see women and the working classes as immature, that is.

I think generally we are terrible at interpreting it though.