votes at 16 is a classic labour policy - for all the wrong reasons

Nigel Farage has been courting youth voters for years (Picture: Getty Images)

When the news broke that the government would be lowering the voting age to 16 before the next general election,my first thought was: Finally. 

My second: Starmer is panicking.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m fully in favour of votes at 16. You’ve heard all the arguments before; If they pay taxes,and can join the army,they deserve a democratic say in the decisions shaping their future. 

But let’s not pretend that this ‘seismic’ reform is being undertaken purely as a matter of principle. Keir Starmer and his team in No 10 did not wake up this morning with a burning desire for youth enfranchisement – this is strategy. Panicked strategy. 

For Labour advisers,the logic does appear simple: Give 16 and 17-year-olds the vote,and they’ll vote Labour. 

Wrong.

If Labour is to reverse that,it can’t be through the process; it needs to be the process. It requires principle. It requires bravery. It requires an end to a party being scared of its own principles and for them to start speaking straight and boldly to young people – telling them what they can have,not what they can’t. 

Climate justice,affordable housing,international solidarity,economic transformation – these aren’t niche issues. They’re youth issues. But if Labour continues to triangulate and mumble,it’ll keep losing ground.

Votes at 16 is not a bad policy. But it’s not a silver bullet either. Not when you’ve got Nigel Farage playing the anti-politics game better than anyone and making young people think he’s one of them.

Labour can’t afford to underestimate him. Again.

Do you have a story you’d like to share?