This saddens me. Asked my daughter how she may vote in the GE next May as she was 18 last year. She says she won't and her reasons why are interesting. "We live in such a rock solid Labour seat (East Ham) that my vote affects nothing and besides all the parties are the same"

 

What can be done about apathy amongst new voters? She says she doesn't think any of her friends intends voting either. Should parties be reaching out to young people more and explaining that they're not all the same? What happens when all the older voters die off?

Edited February 25, 201411 yr by Common Sense

It is indeed very worrying, and something the Establishment are still way too complacent about. I would say the people on my history course at university probably follow the news a lot more than the average person in their 20s would - but even most of them say they probably aren't going to vote as things stand, because they think politicians are idiots obsessed with their own games, and because they think all the parties are essentially offering the same thing.

 

Probably a part of it is generational (people not growing up with memories of Britain fighting dictatorships, or women or poor men fighting to get the vote or whatever, meaning people take "democracy for granted"), but there's no doubt a big part of it is because of the abysmal standard of the politicians and the policies. If one of the two main parties were actually offering something hopeful or inspirational, rather than the 2015 election being a choice between cuts or more cuts for the second election in a row, then the problem would be much less even though it wouldn't go away completely.

Edited February 25, 201411 yr by Danny

I'd be interested to see statistics for voting amongst different age groups for elections over the last few decades. Obviously young voter apathy is a problem, but I wonder how much this generation differs from previous ones.

I don't get the impression it's very 'cool' to be into politics. I don't know if my age range is the type of thing they're looking for though.

I'd be interested to see statistics for voting amongst different age groups for elections over the last few decades. Obviously young voter apathy is a problem, but I wonder how much this generation differs from previous ones.

I was reading something about this fairly recently. There was a time when there was very little difference in turnout between age groups but that has been changing. With the exception of the last election, the gap between overall turnout and turnout among young voters has been increasing. OTOH, turnout among older voters has remained fairly steady even while overall turnout has been falling. That is one reason why governments (and this one perhaps more than most) have been so reluctant to do anything which will disadvantage large numbers of pensioners. If young voters continue to stay away from the polls then the parties will continue to ignore them and concentrate on people who do vote.

From a purely selfish perspective the more younger people that stay away on polling day the better chance of us getting a majority, pensioners overwhelmingly vote tory, think it was a 24% lead for us with pensioners at the last election, whereas young people tend to vote tory less, so a strong turnout of pensioners and a low turnout of youths would help us

 

My personal opinion selfishness aside is that voting should be mandatory for every able bodied adult in the UK, like the system they have in australia where you get fined if you dont vote

I believe people should vote but I am not convinced that it should be made compulsory.

Mandatory voting has heavy criticism. Many votes are spoiled because people are forced to vote for people they don't give a shit about. It doesn't help that your choice in Australia is either the Liberal-National Party or the Labor Party. The two party system alienates the votes further. It's flawed.

Mandatory voting has heavy criticism. Many votes are spoiled because people are forced to vote for people they don't give a shit about. It doesn't help that your choice in Australia is either the Liberal-National Party or the Labor Party. The two party system alienates the votes further. It's flawed.

 

Exactly, if you made voting compulsory then you'd just see people spoiling their ballot papers or voting for the Monster Raving Loony party or something. Most people who don't vote aren't just too lazy to vote (in most cases), it's because they've made a conscious decision that they don't want to support people who they think on the whole are doing a bad job.

I would gladly see voting made compulsory (as part of a series of absolutely loony ideas I have, such as having general election day made a national holiday coupled with local hustings and political education events. Let me be the first to declare MONEY NO OBJECT *.*), not out of any party political reasoning, but more because I believe philosophically that people owe duties to the society they live in, therefore have a stake in society and ought to play a part in it. I believe society overall is far weaker when people opt out of it by not making a decision on how we should be governed as a country.

 

I'd also have a union style system where the ballot paper has a RON (reopen nominations) option if people really believe that NOBODY out of the several parties on the ballot paper should be elected as their local candidate, and if that wins then the election is re-run. (If it wins again and there are no new candidates then the original result is accepted :hitler:)

There's no reason for polling day to be made a national holiday. Just have elections on a Sunday rather than a Thursday.

As Tirren probably knows I'm quite a fan of RON. I think long term it'd probably lead to more political engagement but I'd be slightly scared of the short term effects of compulsory voting. And the "able bodied" bit is open to all sorts of problems.

I meant that people who are not able bodied would have a valid excuse as to why they cant get to a polling station but I totally forgot about the postal voting system :o

 

When I was in Thailand a few weeks ago the voting for the general election opened in the district i was staying, the queue for the polling booth must literally have been half a mile long, several hundred young and extremely old queueing in the heat to be able to cast their vote, there was one lady there who must have been the other side of 100 yet the thais made the effort as they wanted to have their say, put the stay at home Brits to shame

 

 

There's no reason for polling day to be made a national holiday. Just have elections on a Sunday rather than a Thursday.

Thou shalt OBSERVE THE SABBATH DAY (plus there's more likely to be laziness if it's a Sunday rather than the actual involved attention of it being a dedicated holiday) :hitler:

Thailand is a totally different story, the "democratic" oppositional forces suggested to make a qualification for the voters: based on education or money. And actually it might be not a bad decision for Thailand in its modert structure.

 

I think the apathy could be destroyed with appearing of young 25-27 y.o. politics who will turn the politics into a "cool" and "fashionable" thing. Few youngsters are going to listen to 40+ y.o. politics who don't get how does the young generation live, at all.

Thailand is a totally different story, the "democratic" oppositional forces suggested to make a qualification for the voters: based on education or money. And actually it might be not a bad decision for Thailand in its modert structure.

 

I think the apathy could be destroyed with appearing of young 25-27 y.o. politics who will turn the politics into a "cool" and "fashionable" thing. Few youngsters are going to listen to 40+ y.o. politics who don't get how does the young generation live, at all.

 

I would be totally against the idea of MP's being 25-27, barely out of university, it is impossible to have the business experience and life experience at that age to be able to represent tens of thousands of people

 

Sure the typical 25-27 year old has backpacked alone or with friends to Australia and has lived away from home for 4 years at uni but that is not enough life experience to qualify someone to help make the laws of the land

 

MPs need to have experience of running a decent sized business or be a professional like a lawyer, doctor, banker, accountant, dentist etc imho

 

Who is more suitable? A 'trendy youth' with a 2:1 in media studies or someone who has run a hedge fund or been on the board of Tesco? its a no brainer

Edited February 27, 201411 yr by Sandro Raniere

Who is more suitable? A 'trendy youth' with a 2:1 in media studies or someone who has run a hedge fund

 

Trendy youth please. A chance of a conscience at least.

 

 

 

 

Trendy youth please. A chance of a conscience at least.

 

Look at that awful Owen Jones, he is in the age group being talked about, the dribbling wet blanket barely looks able to tie his own shoelaces, seriously, would you want someone like that representing you?

Edited February 27, 201411 yr by Sandro Raniere

Far more than someone who uses phrases like "the dribbling wet blanket barely looks able to tie his own shoelaces"

 

Let someone's actions define them, not their outward appearance.

Far more than someone who uses phrases like "the dribbling wet blanket barely looks able to tie his own shoelaces"

 

Let someone's actions define them, not their outward appearance.

 

I would have no problem with a 25-27 year old MP if they had set up a business from scratch and it was going great, the problem is most 25-27 year olds who get into politics join a party head office from uni and work as a researcher or special adviser and get fast tracked into parliament without any real world experience