Opinion: It's Time for Votes at 16

by Mata Durkin

 

The history of the suffrage of the electorate is long and eventful. Of course, the ones we remember the most are the Suffragettes - the women who fought and even, in some cases, gave their lives, in order for women to gain the vote in 1918 (but even then, there were a few restrictions). But that is not all - in 1867, the right to vote was extended to many manual workers, and in 1884, virtually all men - householders and tenants - could vote. That was changed in 1918, when not only did middle-class women over the age of 30 get the vote, but so did all men over the age of 21. It was changed to an equal voting age for men and women, at 21, in 1928, and finally in 1969 the age lowered from 21 to 18, which left us with what it is now. The criteria that allows people to have the right to vote has changed over the years, so maybe the next step is to lower it to allow 16 year old a chance to let their voices be heard.

One of the main arguments for lowering the voting age to 16 is that 16 is the minimum ‘legal age’ for many things. 16 year olds can have sex with their MP, live with their MP, marry their MP (with their parents’ permission), but cannot choose that MP. At 16, teenagers can choose to leave or continue their education or even decide to join the army. However, despite all this, 16 year olds still do not have the right to vote. It isn’t a question of their being irresponsible, otherwise they would not have so many responses at the moment, so the extension of suffrage is the only logical conclusion.

British politics is currently facing a participation crisis. Less than two-thirds of the country voted in the last general election and the brand new Police and Crime Commissioner Elections had an incredibly low turnout with no ballots at all being cast at one polling station. This affects democracy as it undermines the government’s legitimacy. Legitimacy refers to the strength of the mandate given to the government by the people and corresponds to the size of the majority (or minority) as well as the turnout. Without a high turnout, the governing party is in office against the will of the majority of the population. The lower a government’s legitimacy, the more they and the policies they introduce can be questioned as to whether it is truly democratic. By allowing 16 and 17 year olds to vote, the number of those who can vote will increase, as will the turnout.

The argument that 16 and 17 year olds are not mature enough, or lack the intelligence to make rational political decisions is outrageous. What makes an 18 year old any different from a 17 year old? If 16 and 17 year olds are ‘immature’, an 18 year old can’t be that much more mature. If education is a problem, then it should be something to fix, and not to be used as an argument against. Instead of not allowing 16 and 17 year olds to vote on the grounds of ignorance and immaturity, politicians should be concentrating on creating an education system that educates young people politically. This will help them directly, as they will need to have this knowledge for later on in life.

In fact, lowering the age could also help create a better educated electorate. If the public are learning about politics at a younger age and getting directly involved younger, overall that will create a more politically educated electorate, which can only be a good thing. Currently, many would say that the electorate and the majority of the public know nothing or very little of politics, but getting involved younger may change that. This would also have the effect of removing or at least lessening the disillusion that is generally associated with politics, which would benefit society on a whole. If there is less disillusionment with politics, then overall, that can only be a good thing for democracy.

Many feel that youth interests are currently ignored and disregarded, so having 16 and 17 year olds being able to vote would allow politicians to take their view into account more. This way, the interests of young people will no longer be that topic that politicians have as a worry at the back of their mind, as they will have to include the views of young people in their policy making decisions.

16 year olds aren’t the trouble-making hooligans that match the stereotype, and they should not be denied the vote on the grounds of mere prejudice. Instead of making hypothetical accusations about what they would do with the vote, people should just accept that we are in fact more mature than they think, and are actually ready for this responsibility. Some changes to the education system to include more political education would help, but even so, I feel that the UK is ready for this change. It is natural for things to change, and this would be a change for the better.

Read More

Opinion: Why Labour needs a hero...

by Sophia James

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it’s Ed Miliband and the One Nation Avengers. 

Yesterday Ed Miliband was dubbed an action hero after he dived into a busy London road and rescued a 29 year old woman from a bike accident. The woman in question, Ella Phillips, hailed the Labour leader a “suave”, “attractive” and stylishly dressed man, “a bit like an action hero”. Perhaps she was still concussed... however, the gallant, superhuman image of Red Ed swooping into British politics with his tights and cape are needed now more than ever.

Let’s be completely honest, the national scene for our party has been quieter than many would hope, with members being forced to sustain themselves with piecemeal policies. Even despite Labour’s improved turnout in traditionally Conservative areas last week and the prising of several authorities from cold, blue hands, the news - like a broken record, has continually recalled the UK Independence Party’s successes at the ballot box. It would seem somewhat ironic that a party once branded “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists” by David Cameron, are now tightening their choke hold on his party and causing unrest amongst the greying Tory ranks. Is this the beginning of twenty first century British politics lurching to the right?

It was easy enough for UKIP to swoop in and steal the flag. The Liberal Democrats dug their own metaphoric grave by reneging on every single promise ever made, whilst the fluffy Tory party softened up on Europe and a range of social issues. Even the BNP suffered, with their vote collapsing in places like Spalding East and Moulton where they polled 20.5% in 2009. Four years later UKIP’s new found popularity relegated them to a low of 3.9%, which just in case you were wondering, we are extremely happy about. That said, the so called rise of UKIP is not just an issue for the aforementioned parties, Labour need to be vigilant to prevent further encroachment on their patch.  

Youth unemployment figures have remained high ever since the initial crisis five years ago. The Guardian reported recently that young people are three times less likely to be employed than adults and last year, the headlines stating that 50% of Black young males were out of work have left a bitter taste in our communities. Simply put, unemployment will play a key part in the next election and provides an opportunity for the Right to play on the plight of immigrants. 

A further issue which has exposed itself recently is the contrast between the money spent on the European Union and the strain on public services. The argument is unsophisticated yet media savvy. Withdraw from the EU, save money and decrease immigration to open up the job market. The difficulty is that the more nuanced arguments of international trade, free movement and collective strength are being sidelined. 

Another problem is the extortionate cost of the housing. The earliest a young person can expect to buy a house is the not so early age of 38. Shelter’s most recent campaign argues that if the price of food had increased at the same rate as housing, a chicken would cost over fifty pounds. Labour need to be pushing hard for capital projects of affordable housing, encouraging industries to set up paid apprenticeships or training opportunities and recognising the positive impact that immigration has on British society. 

The next election should be about the future and young people are the future. The Labour Party must reach out to disgruntled, dispirited voters and present an inspirational alternative to the ConDem attack on the young, the disadvantaged and the impoverished. Over the next few weeks we will be out in Reading surveying the youth population about concerns they have. We know this election cannot be won on rhetoric and here at Reading Young Labour, we will put the issues affecting our community at the heart of our campaigns. We only hope our caped crusaders in Labour Party HQ will be doing the same.

Read More

Analysis: The Rise and Rise of the House of Farage

by Alex Chalmers
Everyone expected the UK Independence Party to perform well in Thursday’s elections, but few accurately predicted the scale of their apparent surge in support. Almost a quarter of those who voted, seemingly disillusioned with all three main parties, turned out to vote for a party that had previously been dismissed as a collection of “fruitcakes, loonies, and closet racists”, as well as “clowns”. However, in many ways, the government have only themselves to blame for this high protest vote. Whilst it is important not to dismiss UKIP, it is equally foolish to interpret these results as a fundamental realignment of British politics or an end to the three-party system. Such shock results are not without historic precedent and as parties such as UKIP become more successful, greater scrutiny can bring internal problems and divisions to the fore.

Read More

Target Achieved!

by Duncan Bruce (@duncanqbruce)

This year Reading Labour set the target of recruiting 50 new members and as of last night we've achieved that goal (undoubtedly with a little help from Ed Miliband and his 'One Nation' speech). What is also amazing news is the fact that almost 20 of the new members are Reading Young Labour members. The rise of young people in Reading Labour has been rather extraordinary and our numbers have increased from around 40 in 2010 to over 150 in 2012. This year our delegate to Labour Party conference was chosen out of over a thousand to sit on stage with Ed Miliband, partially due to the success we've had here locally in the elections and in our membership recruitment.

Its certainly become an exciting time to be a Labour member in Reading. More and more young people are stepping forward to say they disagree with this Tory-led government and to fight for a better future, and as Joe Barker pointed out in his post, young people are becoming more active, with young members applying for the Reading East and West MP seats and sitting on the selection panels which decided the shortlisted parliamentary candidates.

Read More

Analysis: Reading Local Elections 2012

by
Will Cross (@WillCross61)

There were a lot of really good results for Reading Labour in this month's council elections, in which we regained majority control of the council. Labour replicated the successes of the previous year by winning Redlands, Church and Katesgrove wards, the latter seeing the Liberal Democrat vote collapse to the extent that they nearly came third to the Tories.

But as well as winning those target seats, Labour also succeeded in wards which had not been the focus of central Reading Labour campaigning. In Kentwood ward, Daya Pal Singh managed to win on his third attempt, and in Caversham ward, Richard Davies managed to beat the incumbent Tory with almost 50% of the vote. I'm particularly proud of the Caversham result, as the activists for the campaign were almost entirely Reading Young Labour members, and we achieved the best swing to Labour of the night (13.1% compared with the Borough-wide average of 5.7%). In 2010 Labour came third with under a quarter of the vote, which we have now doubled.

Labour managed to increase its vote in every ward it won in 2011, with Norcot becoming Labour's safest ward with 68.8% of the vote. It's interesting to compare Norcot now to as it was in 2008 (the last time a local election has taken place without a general election/referendum also taking place), since then there has been a huge 17.5% swing to Labour from the Conservatives.

While Labour is very pleased with the results, Tory MP Rob Wilson must be bitterly disappointed; out of the 11 wards up for election in his constituency, his party won only three (Thames ward, which saw a drop in Tory vote of 9.7%, Mapledurham, which saw a swing against Isobel Ballsdon, and Peppard ward which had a huge 23.8% swing against the Conservatives due to Jamie Chowdhary standing as an independent - you can find more details of the issues in that ward by clicking here). As well as only managing to win Thames, Mapledurham and Peppard, Rob Wilson and his team were crushed by the Liberal Democrats in Woodley who managed to win in the seats they had lost to the Tories in 2011.

In Reading West the Conservatives also suffered badly with the Tories being pushed out the Borough, failing to hold or gain any seats.

Naturally it would be foolish to suggest that these results will mean Labour will necessarily gain the parliamentary seats in Reading, but the results do suggest the Tories will be in for a tough fight, and I know myself, Reading Young Labour and Reading Labour Party will be taking that fight to them.

Read More

Analysis: Thursday, 1st March's By-elections

by
Duncan Bruce (@duncanqbruce)

In what may become a regular feature I will be looking at some of the by-elections that occur every Thursday around the country and see what those results may mean for Labour and whether it could indicate a national or regional trend.

This week there we two by-elections, Castle ward (Cumbria County Council) and Abbey ward (Shropshire County Council, the most interesting of the two being Castle ward as it features all three major political parties vying for control.

The by-election in Castle ward promised to be a showdown, the seat was fairly safe for the Liberal Democrats but in 2011 they were hit with a massive swing against them, and Labour gained it the City Council seat.  The question for Carlisle Labour was would that trend hold? and would they be able to gain the County Council seat in the ward?, the results are in:

Labour: 407
LibDem: 369
Conservative: 93
Green: 54
UKIP: 22

Based on the County Council elections of 2009, thats a huge 8.2% swing from Liberal Democrat to Labour, but when you take into account the 2011 Carlisle City election you find that its actually just over 2% swing back to Liberal Democrat from Labour. This is fairly in keeping with by-elections, Labour tends to poll lower because our vote, partially due to demographic, only votes when there is a town/city/country-wide election.

2010 Carlisle General Election Result

What is also interesting about the result is the poor Tory showing. The Conservatives in Carlisle have a problem, in 2010 they did what many said was impossible and gained the Carlisle MPs seat, a seat which had been held by Labour since 1964; However all is not perfect as their victory was small, they gained the seat by a little over 800 votes making it one of Labour's top targets to gain in 2015 and making it almost impossible for them to hold.  As well as this the Conservative control of Carlisle City Council has begun to fade, Labour currently has 24 Councillors with the Tories on 22 and the Liberal Democrats on 3 - The Conservatives are currently hanging on to minority control of the council with the 'unofficial' support of the Independents and the Liberal Democrats.

The other by-election was for Shropshire County Council and saw the Liberal Democrats win a seat off the Conservatives. The reason I am not going to focus on this one is that simply its hard to form an analyses without having Labour in the mix, however one thing that does appear to be developing which could be a factor in 2015 is that when its Labour vs. LibDem, Labour almost always win, but when its Tory vs. LibDem the LibDem vote does tend to hold (although that did not happen here in Reading in Tilehurst ward). The results:

LibDem: 550
Conservative: 542
Green: 123

A swing of 10.2% to the Liberal Democrats from the 2009 election.

Graphics courtesy of the BBC.

Read More