At the Electoral Reform Society, we believe democracy is never a finished project.

Something so hard won requires constant attention, updating and improvement if it is to remain healthy. That is particularly true at a time when public trust in politics is being eroded, political scandals continue to dominate headlines, and concerns about foreign interference in British democracy are growing.

Against this backdrop, we welcome the Representation of the People Bill, which saw it’s second reading debate this week. The Bill contains several important steps forward: extending the vote to all 16 and 17-year-olds, widening the range of accepted voter ID, and strengthening the powers of the Electoral Commission. These are reforms that we have long championed.

What MPs were saying in the debate

The Second Reading debate this week reflected the seriousness of the moment. MPs across the House recognised the stakes for the health of our democracy. While many welcomed the Bill’s direction, there was also broad acknowledgement that it does not yet match the scale of the challenge. It represents genuine progress, but stops short of the deeper, systemic reforms that our democracy ultimately requires.

Today sees the first reading of the Representation of the People Bill, the government’s landmark legislation reforming how elections work. This promises to make some fundamental reforms to the way we vote, as well as who can cast a ballot on election day – many of which we have been campaigning on for years.

The headline reform is the first expansion of the franchise in half a century, as the bill will expand the voting age in all elections to 16. Firstly, this will end the unfair and absurd situation that now exists where 16 and 17-year-olds can vote in half the country, Scotland and Wales, but not the other half, England and Northern Ireland, purely due to where they live. Sixteen and 17-year-olds have been voting in Scottish Parliament and local elections since 2014, and in Wales for Senedd and council elections since 2021. The ERS has long campaigned to end the inequalities that have developed in our national franchise, and it is right that ministers are taking action to address them.

Lowering the voting age will future-proof our democracy by engaging young people in the political process at the point where they are starting to take on the responsibilities of adulthood, and also help them cast that all-important, habit-forming first vote. When people vote early, they are more likely to keep voting for life. The important thing is now to make sure young people are supported to cast the crucial first vote with proper, impartial citizenship education explaining how politics and elections work in this country, as well as improving the voter registration system.

It is likely the reason the government chose to call the legislation the Representation of the People bill was so it harkens back to predecessor acts of the same name that widened voting rights, starting with the first Representation of the People Act of 1832 (more commonly known as the Great Reform Act), which arguably set Britain on course to becoming the modern democracy it is now.

Flexible voting and improving registration

The bill is also looking to make voting simpler and improve the registration process This is something the ERS has again campaigned hard for, as the Electoral Commission estimates that around 8 million people are currently not on the electoral register and the UK has recently been named as one of the most difficult places to register to vote.

Participation is the lifeblood of our democracy, and if fewer people are voting it is becoming weaker. If you are eligible, you should be registered automatically. Automating voter registration will make life simpler for voters, help enfranchise millions and set our democracy on a healthier path by helping to ensure everyone who is entitled to do so has the opportunity to cast their vote.

The bill gives Electoral Registration Officers powers to access existing government data in order to register voters more automatically and allows for pilots to take place to try out different ways of doing this. It is urgent that the government takes these pilots forward quickly to ensure automatic registration is in place for the next general election and millions of voters don’t miss out on taking part.

Cleaning up money in politics

Another key area of the bill is looking at tightening the rules around donations and money flowing into our politics. After the last few weeks, the public will be rightly concerned about the influence that money and the super wealthy can exert on our democracy. Our politics should not be for sale to the highest bidder, and the current rules are outdated and riddled with loopholes that help donors evade transparency – which only damages trust in politics.

There is a caveat with the current bill, in that the government launched an inquiry into foreign financial interference in our politics, which is being headed by the former senior civil servant Philip Rycroft. This is likely to bring forward recommendations that could further shape the bill. So will likely see the full scope of what the bill intends after the inquiry reports back at the end of March.

This bill is an opportunity that must be taken to ensure dark money doesn’t corrupt our democracy. We have long called for greater transparency and tighter rules on political finance, and it is welcome to see proposed changes to protect the UK’s democracy from foreign funding.

There also needs to be a donations cap to prevent huge sums pouring into politics and distorting it towards serving special interests rather than the national interest. The rules need to ensure that politicians are always focused on the needs of voters, not donors.

A big missed opportunity on electoral reform

However, there is a huge glaring omission in the bill – and that is the lack of action on Westminster’s faltering electoral system. At the moment, millions of votes simply don’t count.

The last general election was the most disproportional ever, meaning this Parliament least represents how the British people voted in history. That situation could get worse at the next general election as our two-party system struggles to cope with the new reality of five and six-party politics.

We welcomed the government’s move to scrap First Past the Post for mayoral elections, but the same rationale should mean that ministers can also see that the same malfunctioning system should be scrapped for Westminster.

If the government really wants their Representation of the People Bill to live up to its name, it needs to scrap Westminster’s outdated and distorting voting system and replace it with a fair proportional system that accurately reflects how people voted with seats in Parliament.

Add your name to our call for a representative parliament

Add your name – the people should be represented

I’m pretty glad that 12-year-olds aren’t allowed to drive buses. We have age restrictions on many things for pretty good reasons in the UK, and preventing children from careering down the high street in a 15-tonne vehicle is a particularly good one.

Age restrictions can protect the public, they can protect the individual from themselves – but some are not about protection at all.

Voting for instance is not like smoking or drinking. Treating it as such misunderstands why we place age limits on harmful activities in the first place, and why none of those reasons apply when we talk about democratic participation.

As the government’s upcoming Elections Bill is set to expand the franchise for all elections to 16, here is why voting isn’t like drinking and smoking.

Why we restrict smoking and drinking

We place age limits on smoking and drinking because these activities carry clear, well-evidenced risks. They damage health. They impair judgement. They can create dependency. The earlier someone starts, the greater the long-term harm.

Crucially, these risks are not abstract. They are biological and measurable. Alcohol affects brain development. Tobacco causes lung cancer. Even when young people understand the risks, we still accept that the potential for harm is high enough to justify legal limits.

We do not apply age restrictions lightly. We reserve them for activities where harm is likely, lasting and difficult to undo.

Voting does not meet any of these criteria.

Voting does not harm the voter

16- and 17-year-olds already have the vote for devolved elections in Scotland and Wales. There is no evidence that voting damages a young person’s development. It does not impair judgement. People don’t start hunting down riskier elections to take part in to replicate the thrill of their first vote.

If a 16-year-old votes in an election, nothing bad happens to them because of the act itself. They do not suffer health consequences. If they later change their mind, they are free to do so. Voting is reversible in a way smoking and drinking are not.

In fact, it would be strange to not change your mind over the years, as your personal circumstances change. Beliefs evolve. Priorities shift. That is part of political life at every age.

The only proven long-term effect of early voting is positive. People who vote when they are young are more likely to continue voting throughout their lives. Participation builds habit.

The risk argument falls apart

“Ah!”, the critics might cry, but they can harm themselves, and the rest of us. Around the word there are examples of countries that voted in governments that went on to harm their countries and, in some cases, democracy itself.

This argument quickly falls apart though when you look at the numbers. Sixteen and 17-year-olds only make up 2% of the electorate and won’t all vote in the same direction, so some will cancel each other out. Nobody will be winning election by appealing to just 16 and 17-year-olds – but candidates will have to take their lives into account when campaigning. While a few seats with very slim majorities could be decided by the votes of 16 and 17-year-olds, they are only in these positions as all the other voters have put them there. You could pick any group of voters, when majorities are in double figures, and claim they are the key group who can pick the winner.

This argument that young people might vote “badly” though is rarely applied consistently.

We do not remove the vote from adults who are misinformed, impulsive or angry. We do not require economic literacy tests, because we recognise that democracy means trusting people to make their own choices, even when we disagree with them.

Once we accept that voting is a right rather than a reward, the argument changes. The question is no longer whether 16-year-olds always get it right. It is whether they are affected by political decisions and entitled to a say. The answer is clearly yes.

Building a democracy fit for the future

Democracy is not safer when fewer people participate. It is weaker. When large groups are locked out, policies drift away from their needs. Services erode. Trust collapses.

Young people feel this acutely. Decisions about education, housing, migration and climate policy will shape their futures far longer than those of older voters. Yet they are expected to wait on the sidelines. The trend is towards more and more things being restricted for younger people, well, voting can be one area where younger people are allowed to step up to responsibility.

When we don’t want people to pick up an activity, we don’t let them start until they are 18.  Sixteen-year-olds do not need protecting from voting. They need access to it.

Add your name to our call to extend the franchise to 16 and 17 year olds

Add your name today

I have just returned from a very sunny weekend in Bournemouth at the annual Liberal Democrat conference.

As is usually the case at the Liberal Democrats annual meeting, the mood was jubilant. With 72 MPs, and a Labour party in the throes of an internal leadership election and falling poll ratings, the Liberal Democrats took full advantage of a weekend of news coverage.

What struck me most about the party’s direction is its serious new policy offerings in the economic and energy department. In a voting system which rewards a two-party system, they are trying to position themselves as the second horse in a ‘two-horse race’ between themselves and Reform UK at the next General Election.

Regardless of this, the party remain strong in their commitments to a proportional voting system and reforms to make voting fairer.

Conferences are always a good opportunity for our teams on the ground to build better relationships with MPs and their staff teams and I enjoyed many conversations with the party’s MPs from regions across the country, including the devolved nations. These were largely about where we can help MPs make the case for democratic reforms in the House of Commons and Lords in the upcoming legislation that could bring ERS campaigns into law. My conversations also extended to the general mood of the parliamentary party, who the rising stars are and what direction the party could take before the next General Election.

The voting system

Amongst the many fringes on offer this weekend, the Liberal Democrats for Electoral Reform (LDER) hosted two of their own. In keeping with the party’s serious tone over the conference, conversation at fringes relevant to voting reform focused not on which voting system is better but rather, how do we get there?

The first was a panel discussion called ‘What’s next in the fight for fair votes?’ featuring Olly Glover MP, Lisa Smart MP, Lord Mark Pack, chair of LDER Sarah Lewis and Joe Sousek, from the Secretariat for the APPG for Fair Elections.

Conversation centred around the progress of the APPG – now the largest in parliament – and their recent publication of a ‘terms of reference’ for a National Commission on Electoral Reform. There were many questions about the uptick in Labour MPs support for a change in the voting system but disappointment on why they weren’t putting their heads above the parapet to say so just yet from party members. Olly Glover said: “[On Labour MPs] many of them did speak up [during the 10-minute rule bill] but we need to give them more air cover and find more of them”.

On the prospect of a National Commission, Lord Pack said: “the state of our politics is so completely different so whether that means there is an opening is through the Elections Bill or further down the track is an open question, but it does feel like a much more realistic question”.

Opportunities with votes at 16

Later that same day LDER hosted their second panel, in collaboration with Unlock Democracy they discussed the opportunities for young people ahead of the expansion of the franchise to include 16 and 17 year olds.

With the introduction of votes at 16 recently announced by the government, a long held policy for the Lib Dems, there is a new raft of voters the party must now make a concerted effort to offer policy appealing to this new demographic. With the party’s commitment to positive messaging and headline grabbing stunts, only time will tell whether their plans come off.

A strong voice for democracy

With the party’s full support for proportional representation at local and national level – proven by their amendment to the English Devolution Bill – votes at 16, and more options for voter ID, they remain a strong voice for democracy in the House of Commons.

With 72 new MPs and a strong commitment to voter equality, we are committed to working with them to ensure our policies are front and centre in the upcoming debate on the Elections Bill.

Support our work at party conferences

ERS Members support our work in parliament, in the press and online – making the case, and backing it up – for how we can fix Westminster’s broken system.

Join the Electoral Reform Society today

At the Electoral Reform Society we have long called for the right to vote to be extended to 16 and 17 year olds. Far too many people don’t vote, and research has shown that 16 and 17 are better ages to start if you want people to carry on voting as they get older.

But the right to vote isn’t enough on its own to get a higher turnout, so we were pleased to see today’s call by the Electoral Commission’s Chair for democratic education from age 11 to prepare young people for voting at 16. Robust democracy depends on early, informed participation.

Putting learning into action

We know that expanding the franchise works as 16 and 17 year olds can already vote in elections in Scotland and Wales. During the Scottish Independence referendum, the first time in the UK that 16 and 17 year olds could vote, 16 and 17 year olds had higher rates of turnout than 18 to 24 year-olds – with 75% voting and 97% saying they would vote in future elections. They accessed more information from a wider variety of sources than any other age group.

Research shows that first voting experiences shape lifelong habits: those who vote early remain more consistently engaged voters. Letting 16- and 17-year-olds vote today means future generations will carry forward the habit of participation.

A fair and impartial education

Citizenship education though can’t just be the mechanics of how the government works, it needs to be part of the national conversation. Civic education needs to be engaging and deal with real issues so it’s good to see the Chair of the Electoral Commission recognise the difficulties of this “I can see that quite a few political parties have concerns about partiality, so we’re spending a lot of time on how we make sure the material is really impartial” he said.

He also recognises that teachers often don’t want to get drawn into political debates, so providing material nationally would allow them to remain a neutral arbiter – and teachers could “blame [the Electoral Commission] if parents don’t always like it”

But this is a project that is worth the effort. The involvement of active, informed citizens is vital for solving problems we face in the future. Votes at 16 can be part of an overarching strategy in learning about politics and encouraging strong citizenship.

Evidence from Wales

Back in 2018, prior to the introduction of votes at 16 in Wales, the team at ERS Cymru  worked with young people to co-produce recommendations to improve citizenship education in schools, which touched on many of the issues raised. ERS Cymru’s Our Voices Heard report details the findings, developed through conversations with hundreds of young people.

Through the course of their work across Wales, young people consistently told them they weren’t receiving sufficient citizenship education, but that they very much wanted to learn about the way the country worked.

Recognising many of the issues raised by the Electoral Commission’s chair, the young people we spoke to called for an independent ‘toolbox’ to help teachers deliver these sessions in an engaging and non-partisan way, the need for time to discuss and debate current affairs in the school day, closer contact between schools and elected politicians, an online resource to give better insight into the candidates standing and a national mock election, running at the same time as the real election.

Rather than being seen in isolation as a simple ‘win’ for young people (though it certainly is that too), extending the franchise should be a means by which we drive making better informed young citizens, who feel able to take an active, informed and critical part in public life as they age.

Add your name

Back extending the franchise

In a statement to parliament today, the democracy minister set out the changes the government plans to make in the forthcoming elections bill.

Last week we set out what we hoped to see in the legislation, and it is great to see so many of those democratic reforms confirmed by today’s statement.

Thanks to your support, we are now going to see some hugely positive steps towards improving our democracy.

Extending the franchise

This highly anticipated bill will make the historic move to extend the franchise to 16- and 17-year-olds, something we have long campaigned for. We know that engaging young people in democracy, alongside improved democratic education and support, makes long-term improvements to participation and engagement, and not just for young people.

A registration revolution

Alongside this, the government confirmed their intention to improve voter registration. We have consistently been making the case for a modernised and more automated registration system to make it simple for voters. The UK’s registration system lags other countries and puts up unnecessary barriers for voters. We need to get the missing millions on the register and this will help to do so.

A reassessment of the unnecessary voter ID scheme

After a long campaign highlighting the unnecessary and damaging impact of compulsory photographic voter ID, it is great to see that the government has listened and will be making significant changes to the scheme to scrap the need for photo ID and move to allowing the types of non-photographic ID that voters will have access to, such as bank cards.

This is something we have been pressing for, and it will go a long way to reducing the damage of this unnecessary scheme.

Tackling dodgy money in politics

If dark money can buy influence, it damages our democratic institutions. And right now, that’s a real risk.

Measures to tighten political finance loopholes to ensure that impermissible donations cannot sneak into our politics and measures to strengthen the Electoral Commission’s ability to enforce the rules are also crucial in protecting our democracy.

Your support is backing our campaign

Thanks to your support, today we have moved a step closer to a democracy that works for everyone. You can support our work further by becoming a member.

Members support our work in parliament, in the press and online – making the case, and backing it up – for how we can fix Westminster’s broken system.

Become a Member

One year on from the General Election and we are eagerly awaiting the government’s Elections Bill, expected to be tabled in the next session of this parliament.

The bill is likely to contain measures, promised in the manifesto, on extending the franchise to 16 and 17 year olds, improving voter registration and strengthening the rules around political donations.

We would welcome these changes. Reforms to ensure everyone can access their vote and to reduce the influence of money in our politics cannot come soon enough.

With just over half of eligible voters participating in last year’s General Election, the need for bold, effective change is clear. The Elections Bill offers a real opportunity to upgrade our electoral arrangements and begin to address these problems – and it must not be wasted.

Here’s what we believe the Elections Bill must include to strengthen our democracy:

Votes at 16

Research shows that the earlier someone is engaged in a democratic process the more likely they are to continue to engage throughout their life. Lowering the voting age to 16 and strengthening citizenship education can help nurture more active citizens for the future health of our democracy. 16 and 17 year olds in Scotland and Wales can already vote in national and local elections and where people see votes at 16 in action, they don’t want to go back.

Automatic Voter Registration

Our estimates have found that up to 7.6 million eligible voters are missing from the electoral registers in England and Wales. Numbers vary across constituencies but in the worst areas, up to a fifth of potential voters may not be on the register. Automatic registration would see electoral administrators populate the register from existing data sources before confirming with voters and ensure fewer voters miss out on their chance to participate.

Constituency boundaries

One of the impacts of incomplete electoral rolls is that, with parliamentary boundaries drawn on the basis of registered electors, constituency boundaries are not truly representative of their populations and not all citizens or eligible electors are counted. We support boundaries being based on more accurate data to truly reflect constituency size.

Repeal Voter ID rules

Since the introduction of voter ID, over 40,000 potential voters have been turned away from polling stations and not returned. And that’s just those we know about. Many more have stayed at home and for some voters, such as those with a disability, the scheme has had a greater impact.  Voter ID is putting up another barrier to people who are already likely to be less engaged in democracy and may already find it difficult to participate. This disproportionate and unnecessary policy should be scrapped. If the Voter ID requirement is not removed, significant changes should be made, such as expanding the types of accepted ID and allowing for declarations on the day.

Cleaning up political finance

A fifth of all major political donations in the two decades between 2001 and 2021 came from just 10 individuals. With party finding so reliant on so few there is a real risk that our politics can be bought by the highest bidder. We need a level playing field, where all voters feel they have a stake in our democracy not just those with the deepest pockets. There is also much that can be done to improve transparency and protect our democracy from foreign funding such as introducing a risk-based ‘know-your-donor’ policy; closing the loopholes around donations from unincorporated associations and improving transparency on donations and spending.

Strengthen enforcement

For any rules to be effective, we need effective enforcement and monitoring. We are strongly opposed to ministerial involvement in setting the Electoral Commission’s strategy as part of the ‘Strategy and Policy Statement’ introduced in the Elections Act 2022. The Electoral Commission should have the powers it needs to obtain and share information to ensure compliance and there should be an increase in the maximum fine it is able to levy.

Fair votes

Ultimately addressing disengagement and disempowerment means giving voice to voters and to their local communities and this cannot happen without also making changes at Westminster. After the most disproportional election in British electoral history, it is time our political system valued every vote and every voter in every part of the country and moved to a proportional electoral system.

For Mayors too, moving from a preferential system to FPTP was a huge mistake in the last Elections Bill and one that could be righted with a move back to the Supplementary Vote (SV) or to the Alternative Vote (AV).

We need to rebuild our democracy to put it on stronger foundations for the future and ensure everyone can participate. The Elections Bill is an opportunity to begin this process and we will be calling on the government to ensure it does just that.

A key moment to improve our democracy

This Elections Bill represents a welcome opportunity to modernise our democracy and restore public confidence in the political process. By expanding participation, improving transparency, and strengthening oversight, the government can help ensure that our elections are fair, inclusive, and fit for the 21st century.

But reforms on paper are only the beginning – what matters is meaningful action. As the Bill moves through Parliament, we’ll be watching closely to ensure it delivers on its promises and truly puts voters at the heart of our democracy.

You can support our work by joining as a member

As momentum builds for electoral reform, your support is more important than ever. Our members support our work in parliament like this, as well as in the press and online – making the case, and backing it up – for how we can fix Westminster’s broken system.

Support us today from just £2 a month

The Government was elected on a manifesto promise to “increase the engagement of young people in our vibrant democracy by giving 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote in all elections.” We agree, and here’s why they should do it.

16- and 17-year-olds voting isn’t a new idea. In Scotland and Wales, 16- and 17-year-olds are already allowed to vote in devolved elections. The positive experience there, and further afield, has shown the far-reaching benefits to extending the franchise to young people across the United Kingdom.

Extending the franchise means a boost to turnout

Voter turnout is one of the vital signs of our democracy. When it’s low, it’s an indicator that our democracy isn’t as healthy as it could be. When it’s high, governments are considered to be more representative – because a higher proportion of people actually took part in electing them. The more people who vote, the more people get to shape the laws we all live under, which is an important feature of a healthy democracy.

So, if you care about living in a healthy democracy, it follows you should care about voter turnout.

But where does votes at 16 come into this? The research suggests that extending the franchise to all 16- and 17-year-olds is one way to make sure that turnout is bolstered in the long-term.

One reason for this is that when 16- and 17-year-olds have the vote, they’re more likely to vote than their counterparts who were enfranchised at 18. That’s one uptick for turnout – and one uptick for a flourishing democracy.

More participation in the long-term

Another reason why extending the franchise to 16- and 17-year-olds is so vital for our democracy is that it has the potential to boost turnout long-term. This is because there’s also evidence that if a person is enfranchised at 16, they’re more likely to vote again going forward.

So it’s not just that we’ll have a new age bracket raising turnout: a key benefit of votes at 16 is that we’ll be fostering a generation of voters who will go on to become voting adults in future elections. Higher participation would be baked into our politics for good.

Given that our most recent General Election saw turnout reaching a record low, the case for votes at 16 is stronger than ever. Our democracy needs a health boost.

England and Northern Ireland are lagging behind

There’s also the simple matter of unfairness.

It’s a postcode lottery that means young people in England and Northern Ireland  don’t get to vote in local and devolved elections. In Wales and Scotland, 16- and 17-year-olds can already vote in Senedd and Scottish Parliament elections, as well as for local councillors.

To combat this inequality in voting rights, it’s now time for the barriers to participation to be lifted for young people in England and Northern Ireland, and the opportunities for participation extended to Westminster elections.

Extending the franchise is long overdue

Britain has a long, proud history of shaking up the franchise. It was in 1969 that the right to vote was last amended, with the voting age dropped from 21 to 18 – a change that few would think of undoing. When people experience voting alongside 16 and 17 year olds, they support it – 60 per cent of Scots now back the idea.

For the sake of a modern, well-functioning democracy, England, Northern Ireland and Westminster need to catch up and modernise the franchise once again.

Add your name: elections shouldn’t exclude 16- and 17-year-olds

The UK is no stranger to expanding the franchise. The age you have to be to cast a vote in elections has changed many times – each time allowing even more people to participate in our democracy. It is common knowledge that you now have to be 18 years of age to vote in UK parliamentary elections, but this wasn’t always the case. So when did the current voting age come into place?

A Long History of Extending the Franchise

Nowadays, you have to be at least 18 to vote in UK parliamentary elections, which includes general elections and by-elections for MPs.

But before 1918, amongst other conditions – such as whether you owned property – you had to be at least 21 to vote (and women weren’t allowed to vote at all). In 1918, the Representation of the People Act changed the voting age, extending the vote to all men over 21, and women over 30 who met certain property requirements.

The reforms didn’t stop there. In 1928, all women over 21 were given the vote. And in 1969, the voting age was reduced from 21 to 18.

Westminster is out of sync with Wales and Scotland

England and Westminster is out of step with Wales and Scotland. In Wales and Scotland, 16 and 17 year olds can vote in local elections, and they can vote to elect representatives to their devolved parliaments. In Wales, 16 and 17 year olds gained the right to vote 2020. In Scotland, they were able to vote in their first election in 2016.

These young people are granted the right to vote in their devolved elections, empowering them to shape their own future while gaining valuable experience in civic responsibility, contributing to their development as well-rounded adults.

So why not grant that right to young people in England, too? It is only by a postcode lottery that these 16 and 17 year olds remain disenfranchised.

Notably, in general elections, where MPs are elected to the House of Commons, 16 and 17 year olds can’t vote in Scotland and Wales, despite being part of their other democratic processes. That’s another pointer that once again, Westminster is failing to modernise and progress.

With every reform, Britain has become more and more democratic, allowing more of its citizens to have a say in how their country is run. With such a long and proud history of extending the franchise, it’s time for Britain to take the next logical step: give 16 and 17 year olds the vote across the UK.

Extending the vote boosts democratic participation

It’s been over five decades since 18-year-olds gained the right to vote. It’s now time for our government to continue its storied history of extending the franchise, because doing so is important for the future health of our democracy.

Lowering the voting age would be likely to increase democratic participation. For a start, when they can vote, 16 and 17 year olds have higher rates of turnout. Research has also shown that the earlier you become engaged in voting, the more likely you are to vote in the future.

This means that lowering the voting age will foster more active citizens going forward into future elections.

Participation is important for democracy for a host of reasons. Increased participation can strengthen the democratic legitimacy of governing bodies, strengthen social cohesion, and increase the accountability of public bodies.

Making the most of civic education

Unlike 18 year olds, most 16 and 17 year olds are still in education. This means that their voting can easily be informed by classes on civic responsibility and the workings of our political system. And there’s evidence that citizenship education, by increasing civic knowledge, improves participation.

It makes sense to give people the vote at a time when they’re both eager to vote and can seamlessly apply their newly gained civic knowledge.

It’s Time to Change the Voting Age Again

There was a time when voting rights were limited to the privileged few. But as our society has grown and changed, the franchise has adapted to reflect our changing democracy.

For years, progress has stalled. It’s time to inject new life into our politics by giving the vote to 16 and 17 year olds across the UK, ensuring the future health of our democracy.

Add your name: Elections shouldn’t exclude 16 and 17 year olds

With our Labour government’s commitment to extending the franchise to 16- and 17-year-olds in their manifesto, many an argument has been levelled against the plan.

Most arguments against measures that would improve our democracy are often focussed on who would benefit – and it’s no different for extending the franchise.

Many accuse the government of promising the right to vote to 16- and 17-year-olds because they presume that they will vote in a certain way. However, the right to vote is not restricted to anyone above the age of 18 upon the basis of how they intend to vote so why shouldn’t the same apply to 16- and 17-year-olds? As our CEO Darren Hughes recently stated on the Today Programme following the 2024 election, the only bias in an electoral system should be towards the voter.

16- and 17-year-olds already have the vote in devolved elections in Scotland and Wales

The core of the need to enfranchise 16- and 17-year-olds is the fact that there is a manifest inequality between the voting rights of the same age group in Scotland, Wales, and England.

Ahead of the 2014 independence referendum the Scottish government in Holyrood decided to extend the vote. Research proved that they engaged in the debate from a wider selection of sources than other age groups and that they took the responsibility seriously and turned out accordingly. Afterwards, party leaders of all colours were convinced by the policy and decided to make it a permanent feature of Scottish elections.

In Wales, the decision to extend the franchise was made in 2020. Younger voters in Wales are allowed to vote in their devolved Senedd elections giving them authority over their own future and the opportunity to learn civic responsibility in the process of becoming fully rounded adults.

Sadly, their friends across the border in England are still not granted the same rights, they aren’t given the same responsibility so English democracy suffers as a result. This should hopefully change before the next General Election with Labour’s manifesto promise to extend the franchise.

A seamless transition from learning to civic participation

Trust in politics and participation in democracy has been steadily decreasing over time, and has hit an extreme low in recent years. This is evidenced in recent research, as well as the low voter turnout at the most recent general election.

By extending the franchise, the government could usher in the beginning of a new age for British democracy. The way people come into contact with politics in their formative years is crucially important for the future of our democracy.

As most 16- and 17-year-olds are still in some form of education, it can be easily joined up with classes on civic responsibility, the way our political system works and the role they must play in it. The most logical thing to do is to install a basic level of understanding of the way our system works whilst we have the chance, when they are at school.

Once you vote, you are more likely to vote again in future

The first time someone votes will play a significant role in their future relationship with elections and democracy. Research proves that if someone votes at the first opportunity, they are more likely to become lifetime voters. So as 18 year olds who don’t vote become 50 year olds who don’t vote, 16 and 17 year olds who do vote will continue to vote as they age.

If a 16-year-old is granted the right to vote when they are likely still living at home and have a permanent address, unlike the 18-24 bracket who are often in short-term tenancies and become lifetime voters this can only be good for democracy.

Nurturing the future health of our democracy

With trust and participation in politics and our democracy falling we should be doing everything we can to halt it. The strength of our democracy relies on mass participation. All arguments about who benefits from young people being enfranchised are redundant as the bias of the voting system should only be towards the voters.

Do you think we need to extend the franchise?

Add your name: Elections shouldn’t exclude 16 and 17 year olds