A very interesting Private Members Bill to reduce the voting age from 18 to 16 has just started its passage through the House of Lords, where it begins its journey.
Private Members Bills, unlike other Bills, can start their Parliamentary adventure in either House, and this Bill has started to wend its way through Westminster, starting in the House of Lords. They are introduced by MPs and Lords who are not government ministers and although they rarely make it to a stage where they are enshrined in law, they can sometimes create momentum around an important issue and affect current legislation indirectly. Here at Researching Reform, we very much hope that this Bill, sponsored by The Lord Tyler, will be ratified.
The first reading took place in the House of Lords on 9th May with the second reading yet to be scheduled. You can look at the proposed Bill here or you can check it out on our blog, reproduced in full below:
A
BILL
TO
Extend the franchise for parliamentary and other elections, and for
referendums, to all citizens over the age of 16 years.
Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and
consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present
Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—
1Reduction of voting age
(1)The Representation of the People Act 1983 is amended as follows—
(a)in section 1(1)(d) (definition of voting age for parliamentary elections),
for “18” substitute “16”; and
(b)5in section 2(1)(d) (definition of voting age for local government
elections), for “18” substitute “16”.
(2)In the Representation of the People Act 1985, in section 1(5) (entitlement to vote
of overseas electors), for “18” substitute “16”.
2Short title, commencement and extent
(1)10This Act may be cited as the Voting Age (Comprehensive Reduction) Act 2013.
(2)Section 1 of this Act shall come into force on 1st January 2014.
(3)This Act extends to England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
We will look forward to seeing how this Bill goes…..
Researching Reform 
It is amazing that we have thousands of kids in care aged 16, they are in the care until they are 18 all children in the care system lost their human rights the day they were taken into care, many are in care living in fear, many are aged 16 and still not allowed to go back home to their parents or families, because the multibillion pound industry of our children will lose two years money for that child in care untill the age of 18, i have heard of many young girls in the care system who have a baby or look to get married just to get out of the prison they were put in, which states “In a child’s best interest” so what is behind the votes for 16 year olds when they have no human rights, are the governments getting so desperate for votes due to all of the immigrants arriving who would not bother to vote for who ever in to Parlament knowing of the corruption. And what of these thousands of 16 year olds in care are they really into knowing of governments and how they work, I suggest that instead of wasting the tax payers money sitting in a nice warm rooms with their cups of tea that they debate on how to help the children in care who need URGENT help not bloody votes.
MAGGIE TUTTLE
LikeLike
Strewth. Don’t MP’s spend any time with 16 year olds? I’ve had three and I haven’t forgotten what it was like myself either. I wouldn’t have trusted myself with a vote when I was 16 so why would anyone else? I felt pretty insecure with it at 18 if it comes to it.
LikeLike
Aaah, but you see, at 16 I was already a gobby, activist type who read the papers and thought politicians were creatures to be wary of. And I would have voted, had I had the chance…..!
LikeLike
Hi Natasha,
I wonder what the real agenda is behind lowering the age to vote? There must be something in the wings.
If they lower the voting age then it must follow that all other age related restrictions would be lowered too.
Ms Hewson recently wanted to lower the age of consent to 13 years!
In USA & we are not so far behind…
Obama Administration Overrules FDA On Easing Plan B Restrictions.|
Today in a rare split, the Health and Human Services Department overruled the Food and Drug Administration’s decision to make the morning-after pill Plan B available to anyone of any age. FDA Administrator Margaret A. Hamburg said in a statement that she decided the medication could be used safely by girls and women of all ages, but Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius rejected her opinion. The surprising decision stunned activists. Susan F. Wood, who resigned from the FDA in 2005 because of delays in relaxing restrictions on Plan B, told the Washington Post she was “beyond stunned” by the decision. “There is no rationale that can justify HHS reaching in and overturning the FDA on the decision about this safe and effective contraception,” Wood said.
Will this mean a lowering of the age kids will be in care for? If they are given the vote it would mean they could vote to leave!
As Maggie said, kids in care until 18 years & the subsequent payments that would be lost? Since a greater amount of money, I imagine, is made in the earlier years, especially at the outset of proceedings, would this matter so much, bearing in mind the rate social workers are taking kids into care? It may be viewed that they are not so viable when older.
LikeLike
Hi Dana,
As fas as i’m aware, this is a private members’ bill and is not driven by government – it’s just one individual who has a belief. It will be interesting to see what happens next.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha,
In Scotland they have proposed 16/17 years olds the right to vote in the upcoming Scottish Referendum for Independence in 2014. Not sure if its been granted yet. However they will still not be able to vote in other elections until 18 years old!
LikeLike
Indeed.
LikeLike