Youth vote needs proper grown-up consideration

If we do not want young people to be revolting, perhaps it is time we took them more seriously.

Of course there are irresponsible young people, but that quality is not confined to teenagers.

There are people my age (me, as it happens) who can’t even be trusted to take their library books back on time.

(In the bad old days of overdue fees, I could justify this slackness by claiming I had paid almost single-handedly for most of the library.)

What is disappointing is that when young people make a case for something, in a wholly responsible and sensible way, and have support for it from a Supreme Court decision, a local government review and an independent panel reviewing electoral law, our law-makers ignore it.

Last month, Local Government Minister Simeon Brown announced the government would not be proceeding with the Bill which proposed lowering the voting age to 16 in local body elections.

In the dying stages of the last government, the Electoral (lowering Voting Age for Local Elections and Polls) Legislation Bill passed its first reading, and public submissions on it to the select committee closed in late October.

It could have led to a comprehensive consideration of the issue of 16-year-olds voting and a full public debate.

In a patronising statement about the decision not to proceed further, Mr Brown said the previous government proposed lowering of the voting age to 16 but could not provide the public with any convincing reason why.

"Their plans were without logic, and we will not be progressing them."

I find it odd that at 32, he does not have more empathy for the cause. He first stood unsuccessfully in a general election in 2014 when he would have been a mere 23, before succeeding in 2017.

In any of his endeavours has he ever encountered annoying age discrimination and people underestimating his competence because of his youth?

According to Mr Brown, worrying about how to implement a new voting age regime would be a costly distraction for councils who have enough issues to deal with right now.

But when would be a good time to properly debate this question which has been around for years?

Many local authorities supported the age change, including the Dunedin City Council, not organisations which we would consider a hotbed of radicalism.

It would have been messier than changing the age for both local and general elections as the independent electoral review panel recommended.

However, accompanied by a suitable civics education programme, it could have eased the way for a general election change as critics would be able to see the sky remained above us.

Now, after the next local body election we will have to endure the same hand-wringing about the poor turnout and the lack of engagement in the process we have heard for decades.

Those opposing lowering the age are fond of referring to research suggesting cognitive development is not complete until people are in their mid-20s.

What that conveniently overlooks are studies saying teens develop the ability to make decisions in situations absent of high levels of emotion, such as voting, earlier than they do for emotionally charged situations (including alcohol consumption and criminal behaviour) when they might do something impulsive.

In its final report giving its recommendations for a fairer, clearer and more accessible electoral system released last month, the independent electoral review panel said by 16, adolescents’ cognitive capacity was essentially the same as adults.

Any minimum age would always include some individuals who were not ready to vote and exclude some who were.

But voting in New Zealand was a choice not an obligation.

"In our assessment, the risks (which we consider to be small) of giving the vote to some young people who may not be ready to exercise that right are outweighed by the potential benefits of enfranchising those who are.’’

The report pointed out that if the parliamentary term were extended to four years and the voting age remained at 18, some people would not be able to vote for the first time until they were nearly 22.

The panel shot down the argument young people should not be able to vote if they were not working and paying taxes.

Evidence indicated many 16 and 17-year-olds were already working, in 2020-21 they paid nearly $72 million in tax. All New Zealanders pay goods and services tax (GST) on purchases regardless of their age.

Lowering the voting age would also broaden political representation. If 16 and 17-year-olds were given the right to vote they would make up about 3% of the eligible voting population. How is that threatening to any other group of voters?

It is time we followed the example of Make it 16 and gave this some proper grown-up consideration.