I’m sure some kids would still object, but then this is a good way to start a discussion about rights/responsibilities etc.

Re civics education, originally I was suggesting introducing it in conjunction with the lowering of the voting age, and the point I then made is that I think it would be better to treat the two issues separately. If we are arguing that 16 year-olds are generally no less capable of making an informed choice at the ballot box than adults, but then suggest introducing civics education at the same time, as I did, we’re just reinforcing the argument against it. The opposing view is that 16 year-olds aren’t able to make an informed choice, and if we start suggesting that civics education needs to be introduced in conjunction with lowering the voting age we are seen to be implying that 16 year-olds are indeed unable to make an informed choice. I absolutely agree on the importance of civics education, and the two are certainly linked in my mind (or else I wouldn’t have suggested it originally), but when giving further thought to the voting age debate I just felt that discussing the issues separately may be smarter. Maybe I’m over-thinking it though.

I would argue that civics education is closely linked. If 16 year-olds can vote, then we have a much stronger motivation to make sure they are properly educated about our political system.

I also think it would make it easier for us to institute universal enrolment. Why shouldn’t all high school students be enrolled in Year 10 (we could do this without lowering the voting age by pre-enrolling everyone in Year 12). Mind you, we should also make it compulsory to be properly enrolled to get a driver’s licence.

It was wrong of me to link civics education to the voting age debate, as doing so invokes and reinforces the arguments against lowering the voting age. They should be treated as separate issues.

There are many facets to it that I will summarise:

1. 16/17 y.o are not mature enough to make such a decision.

I would argue that to a large extent this is true. However, I would argue the same for 18-25 y.o’s. There are many underaged that are well informed to make a decision. They cannot be denied the right to vote.

2. Should it be voluntary or involuntary

This is a big and complicated issue. Should 16/17 y.o’s be given the option to not vote while adults must vote. Personally, I think it should be voluntary for 16/17 y.o’s.

However, there are many who want to confuse separate issues of underage voting rights and compulsory voting. Compulsory voting must remain and we cannot allow the uderage voting rights to be a catalyst for campaign to have voluntary voting made universal.

3. Making INFORMED decisions

I have heard arguments that there needs to be more civics taught in school so they can make informed decision when voting. I totally agree. As a teacher, and within the restraints of the NSW DET Code of Conduct, I as often as I can practically teach students the nature of government and the voting system.

However, the same must be said for adults of the general public. Who reading this blog has come across someone who does not understand preferencing (or the need to number each box etc) while we’ve been handing out HTV’s on election day. I suspect we all have. There needs to be an education campaign on how voting works in Australia.

As far as I can see there is no theoretical or moral reason not to let 16/17 y.o’s the opportunity to vote. The only argument against it is a purely political reason, which in my opinion does not justify disagreeing with the idea.