Steve Reed: UK voting age could be reduced under new reforms because ‘young people are the future’
The UK government has announced plans for new voting laws that propose giving 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote in national elections for the first time.
Ministers said this was because young people “are the future of the country”.
This extension of the right to vote, which is part of the Representation of the People Bill, follows the earlier right to participate in Welsh and Scottish Parliament elections and Scotland’s 2014 independence referendum.
The bill also includes new rules on automatic voter registration, restrictions on foreign donations and measures to prevent intimidation of candidates and election staff.
It would also remove the Government’s power to set a strategy and policy statement for the Electoral Commission.
Minister for Housing, Communities and Local Government Steve Reed said: “The reason why the Act extends the right to vote to young people aged 16, 17 is simple. That’s because young people are the future of our nation. The voting age has been set at 18 since it was lowered from 21 to 21 by the Representation of the People Act in 1969.”
Mr Reed added: “This change will bring consistency to the voting age at all statutory elections in the UK.”
He went on to set out the development of voting laws in the United Kingdom under the Representation of the People Act.
Mr Reed said: “In an age of change where new threats to our freedom are emerging, we must rise up and confront foreign interference head on. In a society transformed by new technologies, we must introduce automatic voter registration and bring democracy closer to the people in a country where politics feels distant to many.
“Britain will always be a democracy because the people of this country will never have anything else, and the choices of the British people must always guide our nation. This is a Representation of the People Bill, inspired by tradition and legislating for the future.”
The move is opposed by the Conservative Party. He has proposed an amendment to the bill, which will be debated for a second time in the House of Commons on Tuesday.
The Conservative Party’s amendment, which would have stopped the bill, said lowering the voting age from 18 to 16 was “inconsistent and contradictory with other aspects of the Government’s position on the age of consent and the age of citizenship”.
He also warned of the risk that automatic voter registration could lead to fraud.
Sir James Cleverly, the shadow housing, communities and local government secretary, said: “When Parliament legislates on elections and suffrage, it is not to pass an ordinary bill but to rewrite the rules for electing and dismissing MPs and, by extension, Governments.
“Any changes to these rules should therefore be made carefully, after appropriate consultation and with full knowledge of the potential knock-on effects.”
Sir James added: “This bill unfortunately falls woefully inadequate. It creates deep inconsistencies around the age of maturity, risks undermining the integrity of the electoral rolls, sidesteps serious questions about foreign interference in our politics, reduces protections against electoral fraud and was introduced without proper consultation.”
He also argued that extending the franchise to 16-year-olds meant that the Government “intended to give children the vote, or that the Government wished to redefine 16 and 17-year-olds as non-children”.
In an intervention, Conservative MP Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) asked why the Government had lowered the voting age but 16 and 17-year-olds could not stand for election.
Mr Stafford said: “Surely if you can vote for the legislator you can be a legislator? Surely that’s the inconsistency in his argument?”
Mr Reed said young people in this group deserved to vote because they were able to serve in the armed forces.
Backbench MPs have called for greater due diligence on donations. Labor MP Dame Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) asked whether there would be a ban on cryptocurrency donations.
Mr Reed replied: “There are huge concerns about cryptocurrency, particularly because you can’t trace where the funding comes from. That’s why we’ve commissioned Sir Philip Rycroft to conduct a review into these issues. His recommendations will be incorporated into the bill.”
Democratic Unionist Party MP Jim Shannon (Strangford) said he was afraid of new rules regarding donations from companies to political parties in the UK, fearing that donations from companies with links to the UK could disadvantage some parties in Northern Ireland.
He touched upon some parties operating on the Irish border. Sinn Fein, which has MPs who do not participate in the House of Commons, operates in both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.
Mr Shannon said: “Can the Minister specify what controls there will be to ensure money does not exceed the border in a way that would disadvantage those of us in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?”
Mr Reed said existing rules covering Northern Ireland would continue.
Lisa Smart, the Liberal Democrats’ Cabinet Office spokeswoman, said her party would vote in support but insisted the bill fell “woefully inadequate” and reforms were needed “root and branch”.
“The government claims to be modernizing our democracy, but this bill does not fix our antiquated system that continues to reward the most skeptical members of the political establishment at the expense of everyone else,” he said.
“Where is the new accountability of politicians? Where are the robust measures that will truly eliminate corruption and interference?”
“And why is there nothing that addresses a voting system that is outdated a century ago, undermines accountability, and is deeply unfair?”
