A public document was produced this week relating to a Private Members’ Business in the Northern Ireland Assembly, called “Voting Age: 16- and 17-year-olds” and one of the members that contributed was Sian Mulholland, the Alliance for North Antrim. She spoke about the issue and she referring to “I came to the Building with groups of young people from Belfast YMCA’s Youth in Government programme and then with young people from the Where is My Public Servant?” Edwin Poots a DUP member, introduced the session. Here is Sian’s contribution:

Sian Mulholland: I beg to move the following amendment: Leave out all after “referendums;” and insert: “endorses the recommendation from the Institute of Public Policy Research 2023 report ‘Out of Kilter’, which calls for votes at 16 to be combined with high-quality and expansive civic education in schools to boost voter turnout and political engagement among young people; calls on the Minister of Education to consider this expanded civic education as part of the pending review of the Northern Ireland curriculum; and further calls on the British Government to introduce legislation to reduce the voting age for all elections and referendums to 16.”

Edwin Poots: You have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to make a winding-up speech. All other Members will have five minutes.

Sian Mulholland: I feel that speaking on the motion is a bit of a full circle moment for me. As a youth worker in 2009, I came to the Building with groups of young people from Belfast YMCA’s Youth in Government programme and then with young people from the Where is My Public Servant? programme to advocate and lobby for votes at 16. The only Member who is still standing that I interviewed at that time is Patsy McGlone, so fair play to him for his sticking power. Fifteen years later, I am honoured to stand in the Chamber to speak on behalf of the 16- and 17-year-olds who deserve to have a say in who represents them. Quite a few of them are sitting in the Gallery behind me, so thank you very much.

I will start by laying down a challenge to any MLA who is speaking on the motion today: please, please do not refer to young people as “the future”. If you have that phrase in your speech, please delete it. All that does is disenfranchise young people from their place in society here and now. It tells them that they are good enough, just not right now. I want any young person who is listening to the motion and who is up in the Gallery today to hear one thing above all else: your contribution to your community is valued and worthwhile now.

As we consider the possibility of lowering the voting age to 16, it is important to acknowledge that, in the past, particularly in the debate on the issue, first, in November 2012, much of the debate around it was speculative. There simply were not enough examples around the world to guide us, but, over the last decade, that has changed significantly. We now have a wealth of evidence, particularly in Europe and South America and, closer to home, in Wales and Scotland, where 16- and 17-year-olds have been granted the right to vote in various elections. The experiences in those countries offer us really invaluable insights.

Empirical research shows that, by and large, the participation of young people has been really positive in respect of both their political engagement and their civic attitude and change to that. Importantly, there is no indication that lowering the voting age has any negative consequences; in fact, in many cases, it has sparked a new and vibrant discussion around politics, democracy and what it is to be a citizen. The sky did not fall in by allowing young people the chance to have their say. As a young person told me this morning, Scotland did not just create an army of rebellious teenagers overnight. More’s the pity, I say.

The evidence that we have should encourage us to seriously consider extending the franchise. The potential benefits to political engagement and to our democratic system, particularly among younger generations, are hard to ignore. Before I get into the amendment, I want to address some of the main arguments that we hear regularly against extending the vote to those who are 16 or 17, because I believe that they deserve careful scrutiny. I do not believe that they stand up to the evidence or the principles of democracy that we uphold.

First, some argue that 16- and 17-year-olds are not mature or informed enough to vote. Let us not underestimate our young people. It is so patronising to tell a young person that they are not mature enough or educated enough to understand the world of politics. The cohort of young people in this generation is the most politically engaged and connected generation ever. They have immediate access to their representatives through social media or email, unlike past generations, like mine, who had to wait until their school visited this Building or they saw an elected representative out in their community.

Young people today grow up in a world where information is more accessible than ever, and many are deeply aware of the issues that affect them, whether it is climate change, education, housing or the economy. At 16, they can leave school, start full-time work, pay taxes, join the military and even make critical life decisions such as getting married or consenting to medical treatment. If we trust them with those responsibilities, why should we deny them the right to have a say in who governs them?

Research from the countries that have already lowered the voting age shows that 16- and 17-year-olds are just as capable of making informed choices as older voters. In fact, studies show that young people who are engaged politically at an earlier age tend to carry that civic engagement into adulthood, which is what has been shown in Scotland. By giving them the vote, we nurture lifelong democratic participation. That is a habit that we should be encouraging not postponing.

Another argument is that young voters are more likely to be swayed by emotional appeals or lack of experience than older generations. If we are being honest, this place knows more than most about that in respect of our adult generation. The idea that more experience guarantees better decisions is unfounded. As a young person said this morning:

“Wisdom does not equate to age.”

Initial scepticism about lowering the voting age was based on assumptions drawn from low political engagement of the slightly older 18-24 age bracket, leading to fears that younger teens are even less likely to be engaged. However, data from Austria, Germany, Argentina and Scotland shows a different picture. Studies reveal that there is often a higher turnout among 16- and 17-year-olds than 18- and 19-year-olds, partly due to the former’s being in more stable environments, such as living at home and attending school. In the likes of Austria and Brazil, enfranchising young people at 16 has been shown to establish long-term voting habits.

This debate is not just about extending the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds and not just about fairness; it is about strengthening our democracy. By empowering young people, we ensure that our democratic institutions are truly representative, inclusive and forward-looking.

Leave out all after “referendums;” and insert: “endorses the recommendation from the Institute of Public Policy Research 2023 report ‘Out of Kilter’, which calls for votes at 16 to be combined with high-quality and expansive civic education in schools to boost voter turnout and political engagement among young people; calls on the Minister of Education to consider this expanded civic education as part of the pending review of the Northern Ireland curriculum; and further calls on the British Government to introduce legislation to reduce the voting age for all elections and referendums to 16.”

I now want to address the amendment that we have tabled. The amendment builds on the motion, which rightly calls for the voting age to be lowered. However, we have to recognise the need for all young people to be equipped with the knowledge and understanding to fully engage in the process. While there will always be young people who are knowledgeable and engaged, we need to make sure that we deliver an equitable opportunity for understanding. The amendment endorses a key recommendation from the Institute for Public Policy Research’s 2023 report, ‘Out of Kilter’, which highlights the importance of combining votes at 16 with high-quality civic education in all schools. It calls on the Minister of Education to consider:

“this expanded civic education as part of the pending review of the Northern Ireland curriculum”.

By doing so, we would not only lower the voting age but ensure that young people are prepared to participate meaningfully in our democracy. While there will always be naysayers, this is the right thing to do.

The Minister of Education has advocated autonomy at school level, but I believe that there is a duty on his Department to create a consistent approach to nurturing the civic journey of this generation. Enfranchising all young people without equipping them with the tools to fully acknowledge their rights, responsibilities and the political system would be a missed opportunity. Civic education should go beyond the basics of how elections work. It has to foster critical thinking and understanding of the issues that affect society. In essence, our amendment strengthens the original motion by linking the right to vote at 16 with the educational tools needed to foster lifelong political engagement. I hope that Members will support it.

I will leave any Member who wants to vote against the motion with the views of some of the young people whom we met this morning from NUS-USI, the Secondary Students’ Union of Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland Youth Forum, Politics in Action, the Shared Island Youth Forum and One Young World. This is what voting at 16 means to them:

“We currently do not feel represented by local and national politics”. “We are the people with lived experience of young people”. “Young people in this generation are so clued-in, and it is not because we were taught it; it is because we went looking for it”. “Proper political education is so important. Without voluntary organisations and the youth work sector, we would not know as much as we do now”. “There is a moral argument in that, while we have a National Insurance number and can pay into the system, we do not have any say over systems that are crumbling around us”. “Earlier voting will set us up for life”. “We are the most politically engaged generation ever”. “We need to nip the ‘nobody ever listens to us anyway’ vibes in the bud”. “Let’s focus on how we can make Northern Ireland liveable for us all”.

I hope that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Rt Hon Hilary Benn, will be tuning into this debate online. I hope that he plans to progress the extension of the franchise, as he indicated recently to me and my colleague Kellie Armstrong. I will write to the First Minister and deputy First Minister to ask that the Executive consider writing to Westminster to ask that those powers be devolved to Northern Ireland, because it is right that we make decisions for ourselves in the House. Hopefully, the one- and two-year-olds in 2012, when the Chamber last discussed the issue, will be able to, in the 2027 Assembly election, select who will sit in these seats.