Page 9 | 16 & 17 year olds to be given the vote

Whereishenow · 2025-07-17T09:57:54+00:00

Just seen this announcement on BBC now. Amazing news!!! Now we just need to try and get youngsters out USING those votes.

Goldenbear · 17/07/2025 12:21

peachescariad · 17/07/2025 12:18

Absolutely this - my secondary school ran a poll for the last GE. Students watched videos of each MP and had open discussions every tutor time for a 2 weeks leading up to the GE. The SM influence completely took over from the objective PowerPoints the school provided. There were cheers and clapping for Nigel Farage & Reform. We have 1500 pupils and Reform won with 37% of the votes.

Show quote history

Not at my DC's secondary school and sixth form college, Labour won at both with Greens close behind.

BubblyBath178 · 17/07/2025 12:22

That’s Amazing.

Amazingly Stupid.

A lot of 18 year olds aren’t mature enough to vote, let alone 16 and 17 year olds. Some of them (if they choose to vote) will probably just choose whoever their bestie chooses 🙄

Radiatorvalves · 17/07/2025 12:23

My father (mid 80s) said some time ago that he thought over 80s should be banned from voting. Half his friends have dementia and MIL while really liking the awfully nice chap who came to visit her and became her MP voted blue because she always does. Where’s the thought there?

I should add that he has 6 grandchildren and all (except the 9 yo) are very politically aware.

My kids will be unaffected by the change as they are now over 18. But like many young people they were impacted by the Brexit referendum in which young people had no say.

It will be hugely important to get the young vote out. And to increase their understanding of politics.

Nannyfannybanny · 17/07/2025 12:23

None of my gks bother to vote, talking to parents of kids this age group,we said it's difficult enough to get them to clean their teeth!

ChaToilLeam · 17/07/2025 12:23

Not in favour. They are too young.

HostaCentral · 17/07/2025 12:23

I'd rather extend the vote to two of my best friends, both lived in the country for many, many years, but not UK citizens, they can only vote in local elections. Also take away the vote from overseas UK citizens who no longer live in this country, and have no intention to return.

EasternStandard · 17/07/2025 12:23

telestrations · 17/07/2025 12:11

Under FPTP 16-17yos having the vote is a drop in the ocean. It won't make any difference and any it does will almost all be in favour of minority parties and Reform.

What it will make a difference to is ensuring that most people first become eligible to vote in an election while at school or college which is a huge opportunity to encourage engagement and discussion around voting

This was a manifesto commitment when Reform was less of a threat and Corbyn hadn’t decided to form a party.

Both those swings will work against Labour and 16 to 17 are prime for going to SM for political following, if they want to.

He has to do it, whether it’s still a good bit of gerrymandering for Labour by next GE is another thing.

HangryLikeTheHulk · 17/07/2025 12:24

BubblyBath178 · 17/07/2025 12:22

That’s Amazing.

Amazingly Stupid.

A lot of 18 year olds aren’t mature enough to vote, let alone 16 and 17 year olds. Some of them (if they choose to vote) will probably just choose whoever their bestie chooses 🙄

A lot of over 60’s are too old to vote. They should have their votes taken away.

😎

telestrations · 17/07/2025 12:24

PandoraSocks · 17/07/2025 12:12

will almost all be in favour of minority parties and Reform

Any stats to back this assertion up?

Show quote history

No just friends with lots of secondary school teachers inc. those that teach A-level politics. They were all over TikTok and extremely popular among teens during the last election even those too young to vote.

It seems as they are the only ones making any attempt to address the difficulties they are or know they are going to face since Corbyn. Though they opposites in terms of left vs. right and blaming immigration vs. capitalism, polling which I don't have to hand shows similarity in popular policies. Again backed up by classroom discussion

pucksack · 17/07/2025 12:25

I think it's a good way of ageing them. We have an ageing population so it makes sense to lower the age to me.

pucksack · 17/07/2025 12:26

For those who believe it's wrong, why is a 87 year old's opinion on the coming 4-5 years more valid than a 16 year old?

Quite,

Thepersianrice · 17/07/2025 12:26

It’s quite scary. All the politicians will now be TikTok personalities.

Goldenbear · 17/07/2025 12:27

MyOlivePanda · 17/07/2025 12:21

As the parent of DC aged 16 and 18, I think this is a TERRIBLE idea and the only political beneficiaries will be extreme parties like Reform.

At 16, young people are still very impressionable and not fully capable of judging the reliability of sources. This will particularly be an issue for boys, who are already targeted by Andrew Tate and his ilk.

I love my 16 year old DS dearly, but would not trust him to make a fully informed decision on how to vote on major issues that will impact the whole country.

My DS is 18 but at sixth form college so 16, 17 was far more knowledgeable on politics and the economy than I'd say 85 % of adults in the UK and on a par with 10%. His friends are similar, none of them are interested in the manosphere and certainly not Reform.

pucksack · 17/07/2025 12:27

16 and 17 year olds think they know things but they don't, at that age they are very impressionable to extreme left and right positions

Plenty of older people are too...

user4287964265 · 17/07/2025 12:27

My kids would have been more than capable of forming a rational thought process to their vote at 16/17. However, if there was something more exciting to go and do, I doubt a trip to the polling station would have been high on their priorities, and one of them did A level politics!

I’m not sure this will pan out in labours favour, I can see non-mainstream parties benefiting.

pucksack · 17/07/2025 12:28

I'm pleased that younger generations will finally have a say and a voice about their future.

Yep

GasPanic · 17/07/2025 12:28

BloominNora · 17/07/2025 12:19

Because the right wing never gerrymander of course.....the recent constituency boundary changes which were done based on the electoral roll for the first time, instead of population, thus affecting representation for inner city, poorer communities (who are less likely to be on the electoral roll, but if they are registered are more likely to vote for left wing parties) more than the right leaning leafy suburbs (where voter registration is higher) were not at all an attempt to gerrymander the vote in favour of the Tories (not that it did them any good).

Why would 16 year olds be more likely to vote Labour anyway? If the argument is that they are easily manipulated, it's a daft one because they can be just as easily manipulated by the right wing - who have much more expertise and coverage in that particular area, both in terms of media and social media coverage and form for offering up populist policies which do more harm than good.

If the 'fear' is that Labour will manipulate them by offering up policies which actually mean something to them - well then tough luck to the right, because it is about time someone did!

Maybe politicians will actually start looking to make things better for the younger generation instead of pandering to the older generation who benefitted enormously in their youth, but then pulled up the ladder behind them and are now sat on most of the nations wealth like Smaug on his pile of gold while going scorched earth on anyone who tries to make things fairer!

Show quote history

All parties do it.

You're naive if you believe Labour are doing it out of some sort of ideal. They're doing it because they hope it will benefit them.

I remember the Labour lot on here being pretty vocal on here about voter ID. Why ? Because they perceived it would benefit the Tories.

Just because all parties do it doesn't mean they should be allowed to get away with doing it without consequence.

Otherwise they would just do it more.

Sometimes there are legitmate reasons for changing the voting system. And sometimes there aren't.

123teenagerfood · 17/07/2025 12:28

itsnotabouthepasta · 17/07/2025 11:07

I think its a good thing. We complain that younger generations aren't politically active - that's because they've been told their opinions don't matter.

What we need to do is bring politics into the national curriculum so we can educate younger generations to have a voice, use their voice and learn what their vote will mean.

For those who believe it's wrong, why is a 87 year old's opinion on the coming 4-5 years more valid than a 16 year old?

This is a horrible way to think, just because you think they will die they have no right to vote? People of all ages die, some the day after they vote. I come from a family that has a long history of living into their late 90s in good physical and mental health.

HostaCentral · 17/07/2025 12:28

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/voting-age-by-country

We would be a massive outlier in world terms. No-one else seems to think it is a good idea.

PandoraSocks · 17/07/2025 12:28

telestrations · 17/07/2025 12:24

No just friends with lots of secondary school teachers inc. those that teach A-level politics. They were all over TikTok and extremely popular among teens during the last election even those too young to vote.

It seems as they are the only ones making any attempt to address the difficulties they are or know they are going to face since Corbyn. Though they opposites in terms of left vs. right and blaming immigration vs. capitalism, polling which I don't have to hand shows similarity in popular policies. Again backed up by classroom discussion

Edited

Show quote history

Well then the only stats we can go by is the current voting intentions of 18-24 year olds, which I am sure will be quite similar to 16/17 year olds:

pucksack · 17/07/2025 12:29

Reading comments on social.media from grown adults proves that life experience doesn't preclude ignorance and stupidity.

Thank you

EasternStandard · 17/07/2025 12:29

Goldenbear · 17/07/2025 12:21

Not at my DC's secondary school and sixth form college, Labour won at both with Greens close behind.

Show quote history

It could be Corbyn’s party when it sets up.

It’ll depend on the area, others will be more Reform.

BIossomtoes · 17/07/2025 12:29

user4287964265 · 17/07/2025 12:27

My kids would have been more than capable of forming a rational thought process to their vote at 16/17. However, if there was something more exciting to go and do, I doubt a trip to the polling station would have been high on their priorities, and one of them did A level politics!

I’m not sure this will pan out in labours favour, I can see non-mainstream parties benefiting.

It takes literally two minutes to vote. I’m sure they could manage to fit it into their exciting schedule.

Digdongdoo · 17/07/2025 12:30

My 16yo babysitter is far more switched on than my 85yo grandad. I think it's a good thing. We need some young energy in the electorate to balance out the top heavy population pyramid. Enough elections have been won by an enormous cohort out voting everyone else.

TheSwarm · 17/07/2025 12:30

BubblyBath178 · 17/07/2025 12:22

That’s Amazing.

Amazingly Stupid.

A lot of 18 year olds aren’t mature enough to vote, let alone 16 and 17 year olds. Some of them (if they choose to vote) will probably just choose whoever their bestie chooses 🙄

I know plenty of clued up and engaged 16 and 17 year olds who absolutely would take voting seriously.

I also know adults who do nothing but vote for the same party time after time with no thought given whatsoever.

Age is no indicator (obviously, beyond literal children) as to how "valid" their vote is.