Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE GOVERNMENT IS to hold a referendum asking whether the electorate want to lower the voting age from 18 to 16.
The decision was made this week following a formal recommendation by the Constitutional Convention to the Government earlier this year to consider lowering the voting age. The Government was given four months to decide whether or not to do something about the proposal.
The referendum is likely to be held on the same day as a number of other votes designed to modernise the Constitution.
“If a 16-year-old can leave school, seek full-time employment and pay tax, why can we not vote and have a say in the issues that affect us?” said Maria Kelly, a member of the Vote At 16 campaign run by the National Youth Council of Ireland.
“It is only a matter of time before the idea that suffrage wasn’t extended to 16 and 17 year olds will be as antiquated and laughable as the idea that women shouldn’t vote,” said Kelly.
The vast majority of countries in the world have the voting age set at 18 but a small number have dropped it to 16 in recent years, including Brazil, Argentina, Austria and Estonia.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
One of the potential main arguments against this will be: but they will not know enough about politics to make an informed vote.
In reality how many people voting makes an informed instead of voting the same way they have for the past donkeys years.
Plus, for the ones that don’t care enough to be informed, they probably don’t care enough to register and vote too….. I would argue that it’ll only be the informed ones voting (for the most part).
Maybe the younger voters will shame the “couldn’t be arsed” voters.
So vote for the sake of it? Hmm think you need to make educated choices and if you don’t understand dont vote
Watch the SF vote shoot up
I’ll be voting no to that, 16 year olds haven’t even done their leaving, how can you expect the majority of them to be informed voters?
How many older people who vote haven’t there leaving cert done and how many have tunnel vision and vote for the same people everytime instead of having an open mind and looking and listening to all of the candidates?
Same could be said for the current electorate. I think we should give them the opportunity. If they’re going to go out of their way to get out and vote then I would assume that they have informed themselves to a certain extent. The youth are becoming more and more involved in politics and should be able to express themselves, politically.
People under 18 are more easily influenced, that’s how predators work.
Simon, there’s plenty voters who are much older and equally uninformed, but who still fill out a ballot every time. If touch bar people on the grounds of being uninformed, you’d shrink the electorate by half!
What has a state examination got to with anything here?
They pay tax if working and live in a country where decisions made by govt have implications for them, their family, their education, their college ed if that’s their choice and their general lifestyle. Why would an 18yr old be any more informed than a 16yr old? I know plenty of thirty yr olds who have zero interest in politics or voting but they are still entitled to vote. I think it would be positive as would get people involved in the running of the country at a younger age and hopefully that would have a knock on effect throughout their lives.
I had completed my leaving by 16, as do a lot of other people (started school at 4 and didn’t do transition). And anyway, that’s completely irrelevant!
How many people do not even know the difference between ‘there’ and ‘their’?
Why would a 16-year-old be more informed than a 14-year-old? Why would a 14-year-old be more informed than a 12-year-old? Why would a 12-year-old be more informed than a 10-year-old? Why would a 10-year-old be more informed than an 8-year old? Does this mean that we should consider giving the vote to 8-year-olds? Would this upset 6-year-olds?
Pauric, you hit the nail on the head!
Their there pet. On ur second point I personally would be delighted if six yr olds ran the country, they have their priorities in order, bickies for breakfast, sweets for lunch and ice cream for dinner wit uninterrupted playin on ds and endless telly watching interspersed wit some running around in circles. But otherwise ur argument is a complete red herring. We are talking about the maturity of 16yr olds not 6yr olds.
Ridiculous argument Pauric.
If someone had an argument for giving 10 year olds the vote, I’d listen to it. And if it was convincing I’d probably support it.
However, as everyone would no doubt agree there is a qualitative difference between 16 year olds and 10 year olds.
The fundamental argument for giving 16 year olds the vote (among a raft of others) is that they are criminally responsible for their actions, why should they not have a vote on what behavior will attract this liability.
Arguments against the extension of the franchise, which amount to ‘they are easily influenced’ and ‘they can’t possibly be informed’ are pretty pathetic – we all know people over the age of majority who are easily influenced and uninformed. When did being informed become a criteria for the franchise.
The 16 year olds didn’t conform to the European cartels demands that we vote Yes and change our No vote In the Lisbon treaty.
It’s called C.S.P.E
Pauric, it is called maturing something that has failed you!
introduce a MAXIMUM voting age instead, and get rid of the swathes of people that have turned out for FF & FG for generations.
If you’re going to say 16 year olds are not ‘informed enough’ to vote you really should be in favor of excluding large swathes of the population that are clueless regardless of age from voting
And people who cannot spell ‘favour’.
Ah, do me a flavor.!
Pauric the government spin doctor has surfaced!
Favor is the more correct older Anglo spelling of favour, Americans prefer the older spelling, while Britons prefer the more modern…
In fact if you type favour into a United States(English) iPhone as mine is due to SIRI better understanding my accent than when set to United Kingdom(English) it will prompt you to autocorrect to favor.
Favor is used approx 6 times more in literature the world over compared to Favour.
Andrew Telford, the English way off spelling English words is always preferable.
Andrew, I tend to agree with you a lot anyway!
Given the strongly held, and yet extremely ignorant. political views I had at 16, I am glad I didn’t have the vote!
Oh boy… That will dilute the religious crusty, conservative, nationalistic, racist anti marriage equality and women’s reproductive demographic…
Could swing a majority vote on a good few key issues and no doubt will be resisted by many
Have a look at YD, way too easily led at that age.
Just one thing. This is not an pro chioce/life debate. ITS A VOTING AGE DISCUSSION.
can 16 year olds vote in this referendum?
No! The referendum will decide whether 16 and 17 year olds may vote in future referenda and elections
Could be good or could be bad but at the end of the day it will allow them to vote on their own future. It’s only fair
I don’t think they should be allowed , still to young, in that case lower the drinking age to 16 aswel. You have to be mature enough to make a decision and they aren’t mature enough at 16 they’re still kids! And I’m pretty sure they’re would be easily influenced by their friends.
Take a good look around and see what 16 yr olds get up to these days,and you want them to vote??? The party that lowers the legal drinking age to 16 would get a landslide!!! Lol
Paul, take a look around and see what the corrupt politicians and bankers have got us into these days? We underestimate our youth and see all teenagers through the eyes of Paul Williams and the tabloid trash. Maybe we should give our youth more responsibility about their future and how they would like to have a say in how our country is being handled or should I write mishandled!
If you swapped out “16 year old” and replaced it with a word to represent a particular gender or race then most of the above comments would be disgraceful. Why is it acceptable to generalise, undermine and underestimate the intelligence of any group in society? There are some seriously ageist comments here. Young people are like any other group in society – a mix of intelligent, well informed people, complete idiots and those who are a healthy mix of the two! Whether young people get drunk out of their minds or like to spend the evening watching Prime Time is irrelevant to this debate. The question is – if you are able to work, pay taxes and are directly affected by decisions made by government then surely you should have the right to have a say in the running of the country / changes to the constitution?
I think it’s a little immature to be equating being under-age with racism or sexism …
I was highlighting ageism as an issue. Don’t really see how that is immature? If ageism wasn’t an issue there wouldn’t be cause for policy surrounding it or indeed national and international organisations dedicated to combatting it. My point was actually about the immaturity of making sweeping generalisations.
swapping out “16 year old” and replacing it with a word to represent a particular gender or race, then presenting it as ageism, seems like a pretty sweeping generalisation to me.
While I understand your point I have to disagree. Teens that age are still quite impressionable and with the influence Sinn Fein has in the younger generation, that’s dangerous. This does make an argument for political parties to target this group early to ensure when they do reach the age to vote they are informed. I wouldn’t consider some of the comments here ageist, I would consider them logical. Lets be fair, how many 16 years olds do you know that you could have a good political discussion with? On the flip side there are many people of all ages who are just as uninformed but the difference I believe is that a lot of those people who are uninformed don’t even bother voting whereas you give a 16 year old the option to vote, that’s exciting for them as its new, first time voting they will make the effort to vote which while great that they turn out is not great if they are uninformed. If you leave it until 18 that gives them 2 more years and at that age you learn a lot in 2 years in terms of maturity and responsibility.
I think a lot of the reasons against lowering the voting age to 16 are purely speculative and based on anecdotal evidence – surely there should be research into this so we can evaluate it properly rather than basing arguments on “how many 16 year olds do you know that…” . Austria lowered the voting age to 16 in 2008 and experienced higher turnout. I’m also not sure I agree with a reason for not granting someone the right to vote based on the possibility they could vote for a party I don’t support. There are possible benefits of lowering the voting age such as increasing participation, bringing more balance to voting ages, and if more of Ireland’s youth vote then their interests will need to feature more heavily in government policy. When 16 and 17 year olds are deemed mature enough to drive mopeds and cars on national roads and to work and pay taxes I think it is a bit hypocritical to say they can’t vote. We’ll just take your taxes and trust you to operate vehicles that have the potential to cause serious harm but you can’t have a say? Seems like we are picking and choosing what they are mature enough for based on assumptions rather than any evidence.
(sorry if this is a double-posting – original response got lost somewhere)
My main objection to your very lengthy, wordy and breathless argument is that you are putting exclusion of a “16 year old” on the same footing as racism or sexism. I’m not sure whether you are over-evaluating the seriousness of this issue, or under-evaluating the serious of those issues. Either way it displays an immaturity of social reasoning which immediately undermines what you are trying to say! sorry.
If you want research in this area, there is buckets. An associate of mine recently posted these:
– http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-teen-brain-still-under-construction/index.shtml
– http://www.wisspd.org/htm/ATPracGuides/Training/ProgMaterials/CH980-09/BDCA.pdf
but even, based on my own limited knowledge of the area, it seems to be widely accepted that social development isn’t completed until closer to 25.
– http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult_development
I don’t think there is a need to be so personal Robert! I was just questioning why it is acceptable to berate a group in society. Many of the comments would not be acceptable if they were in reference to senior citizens, they would be viewed as extremely harsh. I probably should have stuck to that comparison, more appropriate in hindsight. I was just trying to argue that no group in society should be berated to that extent based on assumptions and generalisations. I clearly do not think it equates to racism or sexism, I was just trying to point out how harsh some of the comments were. Yes I am familiar with the research you have linked to, but no other group in society faces such scrutiny to evaluate whether or not they are suitable to vote. I see both sides of the argument and yes there are issues with young voters but personally I would like to see a more balanced voting age in this country and that those contributing tax to have the choice to vote. Perhaps it would be best to see how it has worked in other countries and evaluate it that way.
ah well, sure it’s not even so bad as being elderly even, as they have their health and their youth, and, not surprisingly, they’ll literally grow out of it in a year or two!
As a 16 year old I thought I knew everything but I was wrong.
Don’t forget there are 20,30,40,50,60 etc year olds who think they know everything also
Don’t worry Declan, you are not the only ‘village idiot,’ many of our politicians taught they knew everything too and they get it wrong!
Talking about village idiots – it is obvious that baby Bobby does not understand the difference between ‘taught’ and ‘thought’.
I disagree about lowering the voting age. I have no doubt that the 16 year olds campaigning for this and quite a few other 16 year olds who are not are well informed on current politics and can make an informed decision to vote. However the majority of 16 year olds would not make an informed decision. I use my 16 year old brother and his friends as an example. He knows nothing about politics and neither does his friends. I asked him if he had the chance to vote which party would he vote for. His answer and his friends answers was Sinn Fein and only because they were the only party they knew due to the link of the queens visit and the IRA and Celtic etc. they didnt know about fine gael, labor etc now I’m not trying to offend anyone but it would be a dark day for this country if Sinn Fein got into power. Most 16 year olds I know don’t have any interest in politics and barely know the name of their elected representatives so I think keeping the voting age at 18 is a better move. Unfortunately for those 16 years who are well informed you will hae to wait another 2 years but by keeping upto date and keeping informed you will be even better informed going to the polls at 18.
yes the more that can vote to get these baby killers out the better
Chances are, most younger voters are pro-choice.
I’d imagine that demographic is largely pro-choice
WHAT.
Think ull find it will have the opposite effect, and move Ireland into the 21st century
Jesus, Jim you’re a father of daughters I hope you never have to go through the mental torture & agony that so many fathers of rape victims have gone through, when they’re told that their loved ones are now pregnant.
I think all the pro-life supporters who shove their opinions in the most offensive way into people’s faces would be highly surprise with the volume of support the pro choice campaign has,and if it were put to the referendum they demand the equally would go against them, particularly with the youth vote.
Too immature to have influence on the running of the country. And too easily led at that age. If it’s a problem with lack of turnout at elections I’d rather make voting compulsory for those fit enough to cast their ballot. At 16 you can work but really you’re learning about work and getting experience. Paying tax doesn’t necessarily equate to having voting rights.
And if the vote is no they’ll keep bringing it back until they get a yes…these guys have no intrrest in what the majority want….don’t fall for it nrxy time round…stick it to them on the doorstep..if they won’t engage give your vote to somebody who will…independent, fringe party…whatever.
& apologies for bad typing…bus jumping around!
House of pain style?
The second last paragraph really is a silly comparison of the debate
Let 16 year olds vote they said…..be grand they said…..
Until they get back in the mines I’ll be damned if they get near a vote. National service is what they need not suffrage.
Hope Jedward don’t run for office !
There shouldnt be a problem having a referendum on abortion at the same time then. Get the voting age, abolition of the Seanad and the abortion issue done on the same day.
So many referendums, so little consultation.
This proposal if it succeeds could put an incredible amount of power in the hands of schoolteachers… Oh wait!
Hitlers model of “get them while they’re young” resulting in no country for old men.
have your say