Whether you’re for lowering the voting age to sixteen, or against it, there’s no denying this is one of the sexier Bills making its way through Parliament at the moment.
The Voting Age (Comprehensive Reduction) Bill hopes to extend the franchise for parliamentary and other elections as well as referendums, to all citizens over the age of 16. The first reading took place in the House of Lords on 22nd October 2012 (a second reading is yet to be scheduled). In the meantime, the Bill has been published, and you can check it out here.
The Bill was mentioned again in the House of Lords yesterday. It will be interesting to see what happens next. Let the journey begin…..
Researching Reform 
“this is one of the sexier Bills making its way through Parliament…”
I have to agree here. Nothing quite as sexy as a Bill which utilises parentheses as this racy little number does. Comprehensive reduction: yummy.
LikeLike
Does everything have to be reduced to either being ‘sexy’ or not sexy these days ? Are we a land of illiterates, unable to function without resorting to hyperbole ?
IMO it is crazy to cluster all the major milestones in a teenagers’ life at 16 or thereabouts. ‘Rites of passage’ the acceptance of a new generation into the mainstream, should be spread over a number of years and not given in one big dollop.
Without rites of passage we shall end up with Crimes of Passage,
LikeLike
If you don’t like what you read here R, please leave the forum. You’ve been warned before about being rude to posters and web masters alike, so consider this your final warning. I hope that was hyperbole free enough for you.
LikeLike
This is a great site. Quality information delivered with a human touch, and always well written. Keep up the good work, regardless of the odd critic.
LikeLike
Thank you Mark, that’s very kind.
LikeLike
If I don’t like what I read here why (in a democratic society that prides itself on tolerance) should I leave the forum ? isn’t the purpose of a forum to hear competing views ? The principle feature of many articles, be it Melanie Phillips, Robert Rowthorn or Charles Murray (to take just one sliver of life), is to object or challenge what other people have said or written.
Within all our living memories we have had ‘sexed up’ documents that minister assured us were completely true and those that decried them fired from their jobs. But who was proved right in the end ?
If I had received comparable comments on my blog site I would have dealt with it/them in the third party acknowledging that there is a tendency is many spheres of life to exaggerate or mis-name and perhaps reflecting that I could have chosen better words or phrases. I certainly would not take it personally as I would know it was not meant as such – or if it was it was bona fide and a genuinely held opinion and therefore not something to be lightly or casually dismissed.
Censorship works at its best when we censor oursleves.
LikeLike
The whole point of this site is to engage different points of view. This can be done civilly. Give it a go, or you will be removed. This is not the first time I have asked you to do this.
LikeLike