Votes at Sixteen? Surely Not!
| Date | 01 April 2013 |
| Published date | 01 April 2013 |
| Author | David Denver |
| DOI | 10.1111/2041-9066.12011 |
| Subject Matter | Foresight |
require parental consent to marry
in England and Wales and very few
actually take this step. Data from the
Office for National Statistics show
that in 2010 just 0.014 per cent of
males aged 16–17 in England and
Wales were married and just 0.076
per cent of females. This represents
about 100 boys and 500 girls.
Parental consent is also required
for those under 18 to join the armed
forces. In addition, these recruits
cannot be assigned front-line duties
since the UK is a signatory to the
UN Convention on the Rights of the
Child, which defines childhood as
lasting until 18.
It seems likely that some 16 and 17
year olds do indeed engage in sexual
activity. The point here, however, is
that there is no apparent connec-
tion between having the right to do
this and having the right to vote.
There is no inconsistency in argu-
ing that rights in different spheres
of activity should be conferred at
different ages, given that there is
no logical connection between the
activities. Just because some rights
are acquired at 16 this does not
necessarily imply that an unrelated
right should also be granted at the
same age. This is recognized in UK
law. Sixteen year olds may engage
in sex but they cannot drive a car;
16 and 17 year olds cannot buy
alcohol, tobacco or fireworks; nei-
ther can they sit on a jury, gamble
or sign a contract. There is talk of
banning young drivers from carry-
ing passengers or driving at night. If
it were valid to argue for lowering
Arguments in favour of lowering
the voting age to 16 last received
a wide airing around ten years ago
when the Electoral Commission
considered the case for change
being made by various self-
appointed pressure groups. Despite
appearing to incline towards change
at the outset of consultations, the
Commission’s final recommendation
was against (Electoral Commission,
2004). That conclusion was heavily
influenced by evidence of massive
public opposition – a specially
commissioned poll found that at
least 78 per cent of the electorate
was against change. In addition,
there was plainly a lack of demand
among young people themselves
(only 35 per cent of those aged
15–19 wanted votes at 16). Finally,
the Commission recognised that
the arguments for change would
not bear serious scrutiny (although
the relevant report was more polite
than that). Now, with 16 and 17
year olds eligible to vote in next
year’s independence referendum in
Scotland, it is worth revisiting some
of these arguments again:
Sex, Marriage and the Army
Perhaps the argument most
frequently put forward by
proponents of a lower voting age is
that because people can marry, sign
up for the armed forces and engage
in consensual sexual activity at 16
they should also be able to vote.
In fact, those aged less than 18
The Scottish National Party’s success in extending the franchise to 16 and 17 year olds in next year’s independence
referendum in Scotland will re-awaken calls for the voting age to be lowered for all elections in the UK. David
Denver argues that such a change would be misguided and wrong.
Just because
some rights
are acquired
at 16 this does
not necessarily
imply that an
unrelated right
should also
be granted at
the same age
the voting age on the basis of some
rights acquired before the age of
18, then it would be just as valid to
argue against because other rights
are not acquired until later.
Taxation and Representation
Proponents of change also use the
argument that there should be ‘no
taxation without representation’.
How can people who pay income
tax be denied the right to vote? This
is another example of taking a small
group thought to be unfairly treated
and then extrapolating to the wider
population of 16 and 17 year olds.
In fact, very small proportions of
those aged under 18 pay income
tax. According to the 2001 census
just 5 per cent of 16 year olds and
17 per cent of 17 year olds were
full-time employees and the propor-
tions are likely to be even smaller
now. The great bulk of 16 and 17
year olds are students of one kind or
another and, therefore, financially
dependent upon their parents and
guardians. In any event, what about
those (few) aged less than 16 who
do pay income tax – child stars for
example – are they too to be allowed
to vote on that account? Then there
are other forms of taxation, such
as VAT? This is paid by everyone –
resident aliens, visiting tourists, chil-
dren spending their pocket money
on sweets or ITunes downloads. The
fact that such people pay tax cannot
be used as an argument for giving
them the vote.
Foresight
Votes at Sixteen?
SurelyNot!
36
Political Insight
To continue reading
Request your trial