English youngsters have reacted to the news that Labour plan to give them the right to vote in the next general election, with many admitting they don’t feel ‘mature’ or ‘informed’ enough to have their say.
Sir Keir Starmer today unveiled plans to ‘modernise our democracy’ by lowering England’s voting age from 18 to 16 to bring national elections in line with those held in Scotland and Wales.
The move could see around 1.5million 16 and 17-year-olds able to cast their vote by the time the next general election comes around.
After confirming the plans on Wednesday, the Prime Minister told ITV News: ‘I think it’s really important that 16 and 17-year-olds have the vote, because they are old enough to go out to work, they are old enough to pay taxes, so pay in.
‘And I think if you pay in, you should have the opportunity to say what you want your money spent on, which way the Government should go.’
But speaking to MailOnline today, many youngsters revealed they ‘wouldn’t trust’ others their age to cast an ‘educated’ or ‘informed vote’, saying the majority of 16 and 17-year-olds will likely be influenced by their parents or social media.
In Newcastle city centre, Charlie McNulty, 17, from South Tyneside, said: ‘I don’t agree it. At that age you don’t have enough education generally to be able to make informed judgements on these things.
‘Schools don’t really teach you about politics either. Young people should vote when they feel like they’re ready to and when they are informed enough about elections.
Youngsters have begun reacting to the news that Labour plan to give them the right to vote in the next general election, something 17-year-old Charlie McNulty (pictured), from Newcastle, disagreed with
16-year-old Ottilie (right), who spoke to MailOnline in Hyde Park, admitted she ‘wouldn’t have a clue’ who to vote for. While her pal Samantha (left), also 16, said her vote would likely be influenced by social media
‘I think it should stay at 18. I think there’s a lot of people at my age who would agree with me.’
One of those in agreeance is 16-year-old Ottilie from Chelsea, who told MailOnline during a walk through Hyde Park that she ‘wouldn’t have a clue’ who to vote for.
‘I don’t think at our age anyone actually understands politics enough to have a vote,’ she said.
‘You need to understand and be mature enough to have your say. I think the maturity of an 18-year-old compared to a 16-year-old is quite different.
‘I don’t personally know anything about politics, I wouldn’t know who to vote for. If I did vote I would definitely research who to vote for.’
While her pal Samantha, also 16, said that her vote would likely be influenced by the opinion of her parents – a sentiment many of the youngsters relayed today.
‘I think it’s good because now young people can actually have their say,’ she said.
‘I know a bit about politics but to be honest more US politics than UK. I am more Conservative than Labour but not too strong.
Georgina Long, a 17-year-old student in Newcastle, said many of her friends are particularly swayed by ‘fake news’ on social media
While Sianna (left), 18, from Kensington, said she wouldn’t have been able to give an ‘informed vote’ at 16. She was enjoying a walk through west London with her pal Florrie (right), 18
‘I probably won’t vote though to be honest… but if I did I would definitely ask my parents, just to get their view on things and I’d also look at social media.
‘Teenagers do have a view though, so I think it’s important we have a vote.’
Georgina Long, a 17-year-old student in Newcastle, said many of her friends are particularly swayed by ‘fake news’ on social media.
She added: ‘I wouldn’t have trusted other people at my age to vote at 16.
‘I hear lots of people in my year group who are influenced by social media and things that aren’t true. There’s not enough education and facts around.
‘We have a democracy class at school but it’s not enough. If there was an election tomorrow I would rather not vote based on my knowledge now.
‘It sounds bad but I wouldn’t trust my peers to do the same thing.’
Sianna, 18, from Kensington, said: ‘A couple of years ago when I was 16, if given the chance I would’ve voted but I’m not sure I would’ve been able to give an informed vote.
‘I don’t know if I followed politics enough or knew enough. A lot of people see stuff on social media and just go with that when it’s not true. I also think a lot of young people are often more persuaded by their family’s perspectives and just take those on.
‘I do think that at that age the only people who would vote are the ones who are actually informed enough to do so.’
Ola (right), 17, initially seemed excited by the prospect of the voting age being lowered, but later worried that youngsters could cast their vote ‘as a joke’. Her friend Chloe (left) agreed
64-year-old James Worthington from Newcastle said: ‘I don’t think people at 16 should be making those decisions’
While Ola, 17, who initially seemed excited by the prospect of the voting age being lowered, later worried that youngsters could cast their vote ‘as a joke’.
‘I think it’s good but I also do think people will just vote as a joke,’ she told MailOnline in west London.
‘We had a recreational political poll in school and a lot of people just voted reform as a joke, so I think a lot of people won’t take the vote seriously. I do think I will vote though because it’ll help us get our voice heard.’
She added: ‘If anything I don’t think older people should get a vote, if they’re over 75 then maybe not because they just don’t have any idea of what it’s like to be young in England these days.’
That was an idea which, predictably, older generations strongly disagreed with.
64-year-old James Worthington was one of those, he said: ‘I don’t think people at 16 should be making those decisions.
‘That age is too young for people to know exactly what they’re doing.
‘They don’t have enough life experiences. I think Labour are doing it to try get more cheap votes.’
The move has indeed been dubbed a cynical ploy by critics of Sir Keir Starmer and his party, given a large proportion of young voters support Labour.
Helen, 56, who was out in London with her 20-year-old son George, believes the move is a cynical ploy by the Government
56-year-old Helen agreed, telling MailOnline while enjoying a day out with her son: ‘I certainly don’t think young people are educated enough, and they’re just led by social media.’
When asked whether the move is a devious one by the government, she replied: ‘Absolutely! I think it’s what they’re doing.
‘Making decisions about income, they haven’t even got careers, they haven’t really got education, they won’t really be interested in issues like that yet because it hasn’t affected them yet.
‘It’s a huge responsibility to vote! You need to have had a bit of life experience.’
Her offspring George, 20, predicted that many of the votes would be ‘impulsive rather than educated’.
There were nevertheless some youngsters left ecstatic by the government’s announcement, which they say will at last ‘make their voice heard’.
Euan Noughton, 17, a sixth-form student from North Shields in Newcastle said: ‘Lots of people are educated enough by the time they are 16 to make that decision.
‘They are allowed to have their own views and be aware of what is going on in the world. I would definitely vote if there was an election tomorrow and I was allowed.
‘I do agree though that the schools could do more to teach about politics and help young people. I take some interest and listen to what my parents say so I would feel informed enough.’
Euan Noughton, 17, a sixth-form student from North Shields in Newcastle said: ‘Lots of people are educated enough by the time they are 16 to make that decision’
Holly Tindle, 17, from Gosforth in north England, argued that the ‘younger generation have more insight than people think’
Holly Tindle, also 17, from nearby Gosforth, said: ‘The younger generation have more of an insight than people think.
‘We tend to be more direct and we speak our minds. Younger people are probably more opinionated than the older generation now so it’s a good move.
‘Young people should be helping decide what the future looks like considering we are growing up in that world. With what is happening globally, there is a lot of views going around and young people aren’t afraid to take sides which makes them more opinionated.
‘Lots of things happening in the world at the moment are impacting young people in the UK.’
Back in London, 18-year-old Florrie agreed, saying: ‘I think it’s good because we’re the generation who are going to take over eventually, but at the same time a lot of young people don’t really follow politics so they don’t really know what they’re voting for.
‘What your parents believe when you’re young you kind of just take on.
While Esme Scurr, 17, who’s studying in sixth-form, said: ‘I agree with the change’
‘If there was an election about Brexit for example though, if I was 16 I would want to be involved because it’s going to impact us the most. It has an impact more on the youth than say our parents’ generations.
‘I think you could say we’re more deserving of a vote because it’s going to affect us the most.’
While Esme Scurr, 17, who’s studying in sixth-form, said: ‘I agree with the change.
‘I feel that younger people should have a voice especially in politics. A lot of what goes on affects us so why shouldn’t we?
‘I’d like to think I do take an interest in what goes on so I would definitely exercise my right to vote if I could. I would encourage people my age to vote as well.
‘Schools do try to teach you about these subjects but not enough to help you make proper decisions. But it is a good idea going forward.’
