With the new Labour government’s commitment to extending the franchise to 16- and 17-year-olds in their manifesto, many an argument has been levelled against the plan.
Most arguments against measures that would improve our democracy are often focussed on who would benefit – and it’s no different for extending the franchise.
Many accuse the government of promising the right to vote to 16- and 17-year-olds because they presume that they will vote in a certain way. However, the right to vote is not restricted to anyone above the age of 18 upon the basis of how they intend to vote so why shouldn’t the same apply to 16- and 17-year-olds? As our CEO Darren Hughes recently stated on the Today Programme following the 2024 election, the only bias an electoral system should be towards the voter.
16- and 17-year-olds already have the vote in devolved elections in Scotland and Wales
The core of the need to enfranchise 16- and 17-year-olds is the fact that there is a manifest inequality between the voting rights of the same age group in Scotland, Wales, and England.
Ahead of the 2014 independence referendum the Scottish government in Holyrood decided to extend the vote. Research proved that they engaged in the debate from a wider selection of sources than other age groups and that they took the responsibility seriously and turned out accordingly. Afterwards, party leaders of all colours were convinced by the policy and decided to make it a permanent feature of Scottish elections.
In Wales, the decision to extend the franchise was made in 2020. Welsh teenagers are allowed to vote in their devolved Senedd elections giving them authority over their own future and the opportunity to learn civic responsibility in the process of becoming fully rounded adults.
Sadly, English teenagers are still not granted the same rights, they aren’t given the same responsibility so English democracy suffers as a result. This should hopefully change before the next General Election with Labour’s manifesto promise to extend the franchise.
A seamless transition from learning to civic participation
Trust in politics and participation in democracy has been steadily decreasing over time, and has hit an extreme low in recent years. This is evidenced in recent research, as well as the low voter turnout at the most recent general election.
By extending the franchise, the government could usher in the beginning of a new age for British democracy. The way people come into contact with politics in their formative years is crucially important for the future of our democracy.
As most 16- and 17-year-olds are still in some form of education, it can be easily joined up with classes on civic responsibility, the way our political system works and the role they must play in it. The most logical thing to do is to install a basic level of understanding of the way our system works whilst we have the chance, when they are at school.
Once you vote, you are more likely to vote again in future
The first time someone votes will play a significant role in their future relationship with elections and democracy. Research proves that if someone votes at the first opportunity, they are more likely to become lifetime voters. So as 18 year olds who don’t vote become 50 year olds who don’t vote, 16 and 17 year olds who do vote will continue to vote as they age.
If a 16-year-old is granted the right to vote when they are likely still living at home and have a permanent address, unlike the 18-24 bracket who are often in short-term tenancies and become lifetime voters this can only be good for democracy.
Nurturing the future health of our democracy
With trust and participation in politics and our democracy falling we should be doing everything we can to halt it. The strength of our democracy relies on mass participation. All arguments about who benefits from young people being enfranchised are redundant as the bias of the voting system should only be towards the voters.
Do you think we need to extend the franchise?
Add your name: Elections shouldn't exclude 16 and 17 year olds