Right: NSW University Professor George Williams: " ... 16- and 17-year-olds tend to be more passionate about the future of our nation and their democratic rights than other sections of the community".
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments in favour of extending the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds
1. It is inconsistent to credit 16- and 17-year-olds with significant social and economic maturity yet deny them the franchise
A 17-year-old living in Australia is able to engage in full-time employment; pay income tax; join the armed forces; be tried and locked up in an adult prison; become a parent; fly a plane; sign a lease; get a firearms license and (with a court order and parental permission) get married.
It has been argued that it is inconsistent to allow young people to exercise autonomy in such a wide range of social and economic activities and yet deny them the opportunity to vote.
In a speech given to the New South Wales Young Labor conference in Sydney on October 31, 2015, Mr Shorten, the leader of the federal Labor Party, argued that if people aged 16 and 17 could drive, work, pay taxes, join the military and make their own choices about medical treatment, they should also be allowed to vote.
This position has also been put by University of New South Wales law professor, George Williams, who has stated, 'Voting at 16 would be consistent with other changes and opportunities at this age. People under 18 can leave school, get a job, drive a car and pay taxes. They can also enlist in the Australian defence forces, become a parent and, in exceptional circumstances, get permission to marry. If the law permits them to undertake these activities, it is hard to see why they cannot also vote.'
Young people are aware of the anomaly involved in allowing them to exercise substantial social and economic responsibilities, while denying them the franchise.
In response to an article published on the ABC News site outlining Bill Shorten's support for granting access to the vote to 16-year-olds, James MacKay stated in agreement, '17 yr olds are apparently mature enough to join ADF (Australian Defence Forces) but not mature enough to vote? Doesn't make sense.'
Consultations with young people by the Youth Affairs Coalition of the ACT have shown that an overwhelming majority of young people (75%) believe that they and their peers have the ability to make complex decisions, like determining elected officials.
2. Many 16-year-olds recognise how the political process operates and the importance of the franchise
It has been argued that ignorance of and indifference to the operation of the political system is not a consideration used to prevent other older Australians from exercising their right to vote. Supporters of extending the voting age to 16 argue that these young voters may well be more interested in exercising their democratic rights than older citizens.
This point has been made by University of New South Wales law professor, George Williams, who has stated, 'Australians of all ages typically have low levels of knowledge about government, and can express disinterest about politics. Indeed, in my experience, 16- and 17-year-olds tend to be more passionate about the future of our nation and their democratic rights than other sections of the community.'
It has further been argued that if the voting age were lowered to 16 young people could be educated more intensively about their political system while they were still at school.
Professor Williams has further stated, 'One key advantage of allowing them [16-year-olds] to vote is that joining the electoral roll and voting for the first time can be combined with civics education.'
Similar views have been expressed by Natasha Stott Despoja, a former federal parliamentarian and leader of the Democrats. In an opinion piece published in The Adelaide Advertiser on November 9, 2015, Ms Stott Despoja noted, 'Pundits on TV derided young people as lacking energy and interest, only caring about sleeping in and social media.
Apart from this superficial characterisation of young people, it underestimates the increasing levels of understanding among young Australians about the issues around them.'
Stott Despoja went on to argue, 'Sometimes, the quality of questions from school students who studied civics education would far outweigh in sophistication the kind of questions I would get at a business lunch.
So we should not be too quick to write off political comprehension among young people.'
3. Allowing 16 year olds to vote will increase political engagement
It has been suggested that 16 is an ideal time to invite young people into full participation in the political process. They are old enough and involved enough in their society to be interested in the issues raised during elections; however, they have not been overwhelmed by the demands of end-of-secondary and beginning-of-tertiary education.
This point has been put by University of New South Wales law professor, George Williams, who has suggested that lowering the voting age could help get young people engaged in politics before their lives become too full with working or studying at university.
Professor Williams has stated, 'It is notoriously difficult to get 18-year-olds to enrol and vote, in part because this can be a time of great upheaval in their lives. Many are moving from school to university or into employment, often out of home, and are forming new relationships. Joining the electoral roll can be low on their list of priorities.'
Professor Williams went on to explain why the same factors discouraging initial involvement in the political process would pertain less among 16- and 17-year-olds.
Professor Williams stated, 'On the other hand, 16- and 17-year-olds tend to be in a more stable family environment, and still at school...It is a better age for gaining the knowledge and forming the habits needed to be an engaged Australian citizen.'
In 2011 the German city-state of Bremen officially lowered its voting age to 16 in a bid to encourage more young people to the polls. Prior to this several German states had already opened their local elections to voters aged 16-17. They found that this group consistently turned out to vote in higher numbers than those aged 18-24.
Similar findings were made in Austria. Research on voting in Austria showed the turnout rates of 16 to17-year-olds was comparable to those of the electorate at large and was actually higher than the turnout rate among older teenagers. The voting turnout among 16- and 17-year-olds in Vienna in 2010 was 64.2% compared to 56.3% for those 18-20.
4. Many 16- and 17-year olds have significant social and economic lives which are affected by the decisions governments take
It has been argued that 16- and 17- year-olds lead quite complex social and economic lives which are significantly affected by the decisions taken by government. Supporters of youth franchise claim that young people should therefore be able to vote for the party which they believe is most likely to advance their immediate interests.
According to this argument, 16- and 17-year-olds are not simply passive children whose immediate political interests can be assumed to coincide with those of their parents.
Issues such as penalty rates for overtime worked are of significant concern to 16- and 17-year-olds a significant proportion of whom are in the workforce and working in industries particularly affected by these issues.
In an opinion piece published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 8, 2015, Anna Parry noted, 'An unlikely army of young shift-workers who pull beers into the early morning hours, wait on tables and serve coffees on weekends could swing the federal election, as a proposed rollback of Sunday penalty rates and industrial reform raises the spectre of WorkChoices.'
Parry went on to note, 'That's because young Australians make up the majority of weekend shift workers who would bear the brunt of cuts to Sunday penalty rates and any wage inequality.'
However, the young people referred to here are not all over 18. Many are currently without the right to vote and supporters of youth franchise argue that this is unjust. They claim that those who are directly affected by government policies should all be able to vote on where they want these policies implemented.
5. Decisions taken by current governments will affect young people into the future
It has further been suggested that the decisions taken by current political leaders will have even greater impact on today's youth than upon those presently able to vote.
Developments such as global warming and the responses taken to them by governments are of greater importance to young people than they are to those currently in middle age and beyond as the effects of such events will be felt by youth into their adulthood and beyond.
This point was made by the leader of the federal Labor Party, Bill Shorten, in an address he made on October 31, 2015, to the New South Wales Young Labor movement. Mr Shorten stated, 'My message... is let's trust our young people because they're the people who are going to have to deal with the decisions that we're making right now.'
A similar point was made by George Williams, the Anthony Mason Professor of law at the University of New South Wales. Professor Williams has stated, 'The strongest arguments for extending the vote to young people apply when the community is making a long-term decision that will shape the future direction of the nation. This was why, for example, 16-year-olds were permitted to vote on whether Scotland should split from the United Kingdom.'
Putting the argument in an Australian context, Professor Williams has further stated, 'When Australians vote on changing the constitution, whether it be to recognise Aboriginal peoples or to become a republic, 16- and 17-year-olds should be given a say. Constitutional referendums typically involve reforms that extend over many decades. Young people have a large stake in such questions and so should be able to join the rest of the community in having their voice heard.'
T he member for Strathfield, Jodi McKay, made related arguments in May 2015, when calling for the New South Wales Parliament to lead debate on changing the legal age of voting in New South Wales to 16 years of age.
Ms McKay argued, 'The fact that these young people are unable to have an immediate say on the future of education, on TAFE, on the environment, on health services and public transport, I believe does us a disservice.'
According to this line of argument, the fact that young people are likely to have a more heightened interest in developments which will only have an impact in the future may mean that their voting would lead to better long-term planning. One of the criticisms frequently made of the current political system is that voters and parties are too immediately focused on their current best interests and do not adequately consider the impact of policies on future generations. It has been suggested that allowing 16-year-olds to vote may help to address this problem.