Votes at sixteen: The impact of a lowered voting age

By Edden El-Hashahar

On the 17th July, the government announced that 16 and 17-year-olds would be able to vote in the next general election. The policy was part of the Labour Party’s 2024 manifesto and comes alongside a number of reforms which seek to modernise our democracy. While some have labelled this a cynical attempt to harness more Labour votes in the next general election, the overall electoral impact of this change is minimal, and may not simply mean a boost to the Labour voting base. This lowered voting age will mean that around 1.5 million 16 and 17-year-olds will be able to vote in the next general election. Despite this number, there are several reasons this extension of the franchise will not decisively shift electoral outcomes. Firstly, as these young voters-to-be are spread across constituencies with reasonable proportionality to populations, their electoral impact will only be actualised if they are voting in a swing seat. This is the result of the UK’s electoral system, First-past-the-post, which produces unproportional, winner-takes-all outcomes in each constituency.

In addition, younger people typically do not turn out at anywhere near the rates of older voters, with only 37% of 18-24-year-olds voting in the 2024 general election. In contrast, those in the 65 and above age category had a turnout of 73%, making the so called grey vote far more influential on electoral outcomes. This issue appears to be self-perpetuating, with young people deeming it worthless to vote in an election where their interests are not represented, and political parties, in turn, not focusing on appealing to this age group. Where young people do seem politically represented, such as in the ‘yes’ or ‘no’ voting binary of the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum, they will turn out at much better rates, with a 75% turnout of 16 and 17-year-olds. Yet, when party politics still fail to incorporate concerns of the younger voters, this level of turnout cannot be expected in the next general election. As to how the newly enfranchised might vote in future, the picture is complex. Issues that particularly concerned 18-24 year-olds in the 2024 election are likely to be shared. These were housing, climate change, and Gaza, with Gaza a notably greater voting motivator than for other generations.

Regarding Gaza, the government's approach, although having adopted harsher tones recently, would likely not satisfy many concerned young voters. The proscribing of Palestine Action as a terror group, ministers’ refusals to describe Israel’s acts as genocidal, and a failure to impose sanctions on Israel leave much to be desired for the concerned young voter. While Starmer has announced plans to recognise Palestinian statehood, these are conditional, and likely cannot save the government’s policy from the label of ‘too little too late’. Policies of the Green Party, who have recognised Israel’s actions as genocidal and called for a suspension of all arms sales to Israel, will likely foster greater allegiance amongst young voters, lasting through to whatever the situation in Gaza might be at the time of the next general election. Foreign policy and humanitarian concerns will no doubt be a focus of the policy of the new party founded by Jeremy Corbyn and Zara Sultana, both of whom have heavily criticised the government’s position on Gaza, and labelled Israel’s actions as amounting to genocide.

On foreign policy then, it seems the left will best align with the wants of many of these new voters. When it comes to communicating to these voters however, the right appears to be far ahead. The connection between social media and the politics of young people is well-known. Yet the right have been far more successful in harnessing the internet for gaining voter support. Of all UK parties, Reform receives the highest number of social media page interactions, with over 1.5 million from the 22nd of May to the 17th of June. Labour clearly attempted to utilise social media in the last election, spending £1.7 million on digital ads, massively outspending all other parties, yet received fewer social media interactions than both Reform and the Conservatives. Spending more but gaining less attention seemingly represented a strategic failure from Labour, despite the outcome of the election.

For the government to effectively mobilise the online voter base, and in turn secure more of the 16 and 17-year-old votes in the next general election, will require thoughtful strategy to emulate the provocation and personality that has seemed to come naturally to the right, without compromising on principles.

Yet the ability of the right to better harness the internet as a campaign sphere is not specific to the UK. Last year, Trump’s election success was rooted in newly found support from young male voters, with a Joe Rogan podcast appearance and endorsement from Elon Musk, both of whom were especially popular online. Perhaps the online environment is better suited to right-wing campaigning, given the nature of social media to reward shock factor. Sparking controversy, sometimes through inflammatory narratives presenting as ‘anti-woke’ the right-wing media can unlock the algorithmic rewards that come with mass interactions, whether positive or negative. For the government to effectively mobilise the online voter base, and in turn secure more of the 16 and 17-year-old votes in the next general election, will require thoughtful strategy to emulate the provocation and personality that has seemed to come naturally to the right, without compromising on principles.

Image: rawpixel.com