Merit in 'making it 16'

Greta Thunberg (16) has shown more maturity than those willing to make destructive comments...
Greta Thunberg (16) has shown more maturity than those willing to make destructive comments toward her, rather than listening to what she says. Photo: Getty Images
Climate activist Greta Thunberg's appearance before world leaders at the United Nations in New York last week will have buoyed supporters of lowering the voting age to 16.

In the aftermath of her speech, 16-year-old Thunberg has been exhibiting more maturity than the destructive commentators driven to make ignorant statements about her rather than listen to what she has to say.

With young people around the world mobilising over climate change concerns, it is understandable there is a move here to lower the voting age from the current 18.

A campaign called "Make it 16" has been launched. Campaigners plan to take their case to the High Court, arguing the existing voting age is unjustified age discrimination and should be declared inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act.

The original voting age in New Zealand was 21. It was lowered to 20 under a National government in 1969 but Labour's position was for it to be lowered further. Eventually, it moved to reduce the age to 18 in 1974, with the support of National. The first voting opportunity for the younger voters was the local government elections that year.

Protests around New Zealand's involvement in the Vietnam War played a part in that push for change with young people pointing out the incongruity of being able to serve in the military and risk death in that service, but be denied a vote.

Other countries including Japan, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Norway were also lowering their voting ages around that time.

It may surprise opponents of any change now that there are at least 11 countries where 16-year-olds can vote, including Scotland.

Confusion remains about the age our society considers young people to be adult. Does anyone truly believe there is a universal magic moment when everybody crosses from childhood to adulthood? At 16, among the things our law allows are marrying with the consent of the Family Court, applying for a firearms or driver's licence, being charged with any criminal offence, consenting to sex, leaving school and working full-time.

However, concern has been expressed about the wisdom of lowering the age in the face of research suggesting the brain does not mature fully until people are well into their 20s.

Would younger voters be too impulsive, easily influenced by others (including their parents) or the latest social media craze? Of course, there is nothing to prevent existing voters having the same issues, and if we were to start questioning the cognitive ability of voters of any age, who knows where that might end?

Would it be better to work on improving the poor turnout by existing young voters before any change? (It is worth noting that the slight fillip in the percentage of voters who turned out in Dunedin for the 2016 local government elections was mostly due to an increase in the youth vote. And, in the 2017 general election, the biggest percentage increase in voter turnout was in those aged 18 to 29. Many thousands of young people did not vote, but at least the trend was going the right way.)

Since 2017, Children's Commissioner Judge Andrew Becroft has been calling for a genuine national discussion on lowering the age to 16.

His concern is that children's perspectives are not heard because they do not have a voice and he says it is time to take youth participation seriously.

He makes the point that if secondary schools provided comprehensive civics education and the age was lowered, pupils would have the opportunity to immediately put what they had learned into practice.

Also, those who vote early are more likely to continue the habit in later life.

If the current campaign does not result in change or even the thoughtful discussion Judge Becroft desires, hopefully those on both sides of the argument can unite over calls for better civics education.


 

Comments

16 year-olds voting? Terrifying. 30? Maybe.

So if the can vote at 16 are they mature enough to enter legal contracts, and be charged for crimes as adults. Either they are kids or adults not both, otherwise this is just another way to boost labour's votes before the "educated" child learn any better..

This is so silly / get back to a school that teaches real life /