Menu
Ireland's political and cultural magazine
February 2015 27
I
F Alex Fogarty was told one more time how mature
he was he could really have claimed the right to
violence. Alex, 15 years old we were told
repeatedly, from the National Youth Council of Ireland
was on the ‘Prime Time Debate’ on votes for 16-year-
olds. He was up against Noel Howard of the Irish
Association of Social Care Workers. We never got to
hear Noel’s age. However, it was clear that his
Association is no country for young people.
In May we will vote on reducing the age a person can
stand for the Presidency from 35 to 21 years – on the
same day as the referendum on same sex marriage. The
Government has said it cannot have too many
referenda on the one day and its commitment to hold a
referendum on reducing the voting age to 16 has
therefore bitten the dust, been “abandoned”.
Leaving aside misplaced concerns from the likes of
Diarmaid Ferriter as to whether 21-year-olds exercise
what they see as the requisite “wise discretion”, how
could it possibly be more important to reduce the age at
which one can stand for President than to reduce the
age at which one can vote? A central political issue has
been subordinated to a more obscure one.
Noel Howard was full of concern. We don’t want to
‘adultify’ young people. This seemed like a stretchify of
the English language. He was worried about the
erosion of childhood. They will have plenty of time for
voting when they are older he suggested. Politicians
will exploit the idealism of young people with promises
he argued. This ignores that promises are clearly the
engine of our politics for all age groups. He expatiated
reams on ‘children on the margins’ whom he felt don’t
have the maturity, despite admitting that most of them
had no childhood.
Alex Fogarty, ever mature, pointed out that 16-year-
olds can go out to work and are liable for taxes and
wondered why they can’t vote. He suggested that
allowing these children on the margins a vote is hardly
negative and merely gives them the voice that they
need. He said that giving a vote to 16-year-olds would
ensure that politicians have to engage with young
people.
The Government has said this decision is not about
electoral strategy. The case for change is so clear, the
evasion of a referendum that they had already
committed to so brazen, that it is hard to believe
otherwise. They are afraid of what young people will
vote for. If young people were predicted to vote Fine
Gael and Labour the referendum would have been
deemed a top priority. If young people were predicted
to vote Fianna Fáil we would have had this referendum
during the last Government.
The National Youth Council of Ireland ‘Vote@16’
campaign makes a compelling case that giving the
vote to 16-year olds would generate greater interest in
politics among young people. It would promote their
participation in politics and put the issues of young
people, as defined by young people, onto the political
agenda.
Research in Austria suggests that 16- and 17-year-
olds are every bit as politically sophisticated and
indeed turn out in greater numbers than 18 to
21-year-olds.Ireland ratified the UN Convention on
the Rights of the Child as far back as 1992. This
committed us to ensuring the right of children to
“express (their) views freely in all matters affecting the
child, the views of the child being given due weight in
accordance with the age and maturity of the child”. If
we were in any way serious about this part of the
Convention we would be giving the views of 16 year
olds “due weight” by allowing them to vote.
We prize youth. They are our greatest resource, we
say. But we fear young people. We stereotype them as
irresponsible, given to excess, and even violent, a
worldwide survey last year in the Economist was
headed: “Today’s young people are held to be
alienated, unhappy, violent failures. They are proving
anything but”. The media predominantly portray
young people as a problem or as having problems. In
fact it is not young people but youths that get coverage.
The Economist survey notes subversively that “The
media are struggling to cope with the rising
temperance of youth”. If the coverage is not about
crime or violent behaviour or binge drinking or
teenage sex, it is about vulnerability due to lack of care
or supports or being victims of physical or sexual
abuse. This distorted generates and reinforces our
stereotypes and reflects what we really think behind
our patronising wonder at the potential of young
people.
This debate is about power and empowering young
people. A vote is only a small step in this regard. It is
shameful that we fail to take it. •
Re-instate the
voting-age
referendum, with
less vilification
and stereotyping
Duping our ‘cherished’ 16-year-olds
NIALL CROWLEY
hush there,
child
