– in the Senedd at 4:47 pm on 13 November 2019.
We now move to group 2. This group of amendments relates to the extension of the right to vote to persons aged 16 and 17, and the associated electoral registration. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 102, and I call on Darren Millar to move and speak to the lead amendment and other amendments in the group. Darren.
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move amendment 102, tabled in my name, and wish to speak to those other amendments, which I've also tabled. If I can just say as well that I will be supporting David Melding's amendments in this group, all of which seek to impose a duty on secondary schools to promote awareness of elections for 16 and 17-year-olds. As regardless as to whether my amendments proceed, I still think that that's a very sensible thing to do. The amendment tabled in the name of the Llywydd, as I understand, is a rather technical amendment, so I will also be supporting that particular amendment too.
So, the amendments tabled in this group in my name seek to remove section 10 of the Bill, which looks to extend the voting franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds here in Wales. And the other amendments, in addition to amendment 102, are consequential, effectively, on that particular amendment.
The right to vote is one of the most important privileges afforded in any democracy, and here in Wales the vote has provided men and women with real power, giving them the ability to topple Governments, oust unpopular politicians, establish new parliaments, and decide our fortunes with regard to EU membership. Our democracy works, and the regular cycle of elections ensures that the view of voters must be listened to, most of the time, by those who represent them. And, of course, if we don't listen to them as elected representatives, then the fortunes of elected representatives can face significant consequences as a result.
Voter turnout, as a percentage of all voters, is likely to fall if more young people are registered to vote. Why do I say that? Well, that's because we know that those who are eligible to vote aged between 18 and 25 are the least likely age group to actually cast their votes in an election. And I haven't—[Interruption.] Yes, absolutely.
I think the percentage might be off, but the absolute number voting will increase.
The number participating may well increase, but in terms of the percentage of overall voters entitled to vote, I would expect the addition of 16 and 17-year-olds in terms of extending the franchise to actually result in a lower turnout overall, which I think is something that is bad for democracy, actually. And I have to say, I haven't seen any evidence of 16 and 17-year-olds clamouring to ask me, as the elected politician in my own constituency, to change the law to entitle them to have an opportunity to vote.
I'm very grateful to Darren Millar for giving way. Of course, we have a real-life experiment where 16 and 17-year-old voters were able to vote in the Scottish referendum. I think if you look at the turnout figures for that age group, you'll find that they were substantially higher than the turnout figures for 18 to 21-year-olds. So, I don't think that we can extrapolate as you're suggesting.
I don't think you can extrapolate the same for a referendum, which is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to vote, to the same sequence as regular elections for the National Assembly for Wales.
One thing I do think that we need to focus on, of course, is increasing registration in terms of people being able to vote, and actually promoting opportunities for young people aged between 18 and 25 to actually take part in elections when they're given the opportunity to.
It's very clear—[Interruption.] I'll take an intervention in a few moments. It's very clear that, while some young people are very keenly interested in politics and have a clear view as to who should form a Welsh Government, the reality is that many 16 and 17-year-olds simply do not feel confident enough to make decisions about who runs their country. They're still maturing in many cases, and very often don't feel that they've learnt enough through their education and life experiences to make fully informed decisions.
I've no doubt that there are some people who are perfectly well equipped and feel mature enough to make those decisions, but the reality is that many people do not. That is why we, as politicians in this Chamber, and politicians in other places, have legislated to make decisions for them. For example, we have laws that are in place to protect under-18s from the harms of alcohol, tobacco and even sunbed use. Why do we do that? It's because we deem them to not be responsible enough to make those decisions for themselves.
One view that I do share with the proponents, those who seek to lower the voting age, is that we do need a common age of responsibility in this country. Because in my view it's very difficult, of course, to justify the fact that we have different ages of responsibility for different things in our nation. We know, for example, that the age at which people can choose a sexual partner or get married with the permission of their parents, or join the army with the permission of their parents, is very different than the age of people's entitlement to vote. But I happen to be someone who believes that, yes, we need a consistent age of responsibility, but I think it ought to be raised to 18 in all cases, and not actually lowered to 16. I'll take the intervention.
Thank you very much. I heard earlier that you said that 16 and 17-year-olds weren't clamouring to vote. Well, my experience, I have to say, is different to yours. Because I find that those who are visiting the Senedd who are under 18 are very engaged and ask very pertinent questions and are often better informed than much older peers. I can share your concern about a reduction in the franchise actually taking part in elections, I agree that that is really serious, but I think that lowering the age to 16 is going to increase the numbers taking part, because 16-year-olds are still in compulsory education and therefore there will be a huge opportunity to explain to everybody just what is at stake here and why they should be taking part in these important elections.
There are many young people, you're quite right, who are very engaged in politics, and those of course who come here to visit this institution are those who are likely to have a propensity to engage more than those who do not visit here. And of course, the overwhelming majority of young people in Wales have never visited any Parliament in the United Kingdom, let alone the National Assembly for Wales. So, I don't think that your argument actually holds water.
I know that there are some who are perfectly mature, perfectly well informed, but the majority aren't, and that's why I think this element of education first is absolutely essential in terms of equipping people ready to be responsible citizens who take part in the democratic opportunities that they have when elections come, rather than not. And the reality is, as you quite rightly have said—because you've engaged with young people, and we all engage with young people in this Chamber—that those young people have the opportunity to influence their politicians, regardless of whether they have a vote, or not. Many of us in this Chamber joined the political parties that we represent before we were entitled to vote.
I can see many interventions there. I'll take one first from your colleague.
Thank you. Whilst I have listened carefully to what you've said, I've heard this mantra somewhere else before. And it was exactly the same mantra that was used against giving women the vote, and it was: 'They're not educated'—well, they couldn't be educated, because they weren't allowed to enter education, in any case—and they weren't able to make up their own minds, because they were immature of mind and thought. And it just has such similarities that you might as well have taken it from those statements at that time. So, I'm sorry to have to tell you that we've heard this all before, particularly the women here who have been engaged in political dialogue, and I can't accept it on behalf of 16 and 17-year-olds either.
Well, I wasn't around when those arguments were taking place. I appreciate that there were many wrong arguments used, and I'm very pleased that the Conservatives led the charge in extending the franchise for women's votes. [Interruption.]
But I will say this, and I'll make the point again: there are opportunities for young people who are below the voting age, even now, to influence the outcomes of elections by getting engaged in their local politics, on campaigning issues, in the same way that young people do, as is currently the case, and join political parties and persuade people through their arguments to vote in a certain direction. I was 15 when I joined the Conservative Party, and I like to think that I influenced the election results in my own area.
And I think, frankly, if you're making this argument about giving young people the vote at the age of 16, you could make very similar arguments to reduce it to 14 because there are some people who are perfectly mature enough to be able to vote at that age.
I'll take the intervention.
Contrary to the popular belief that there's always a good reception on the doorstep, very often we knock on a door and somebody says, 'I'm not interested. I don't care about politics.' Do you think they should be denied the vote as well?
Well, they choose to exercise their right not to vote. We see that a lot in our constituencies, don't we? But the reality is that I don't see people clamouring at my door or, indeed, I expect, at your door, asking for the opportunity to vote when they're aged 16 and 17.
I'll take the intervention from—.
They're clamouring at my door to vote for me, I can tell you. [Laughter.] It's what you're doing that's the problem. That's a matter for you. [Laughter.]
You're one of the great revolutionaries, Darren, and the fundamental issue here, at 16, is that people pay tax. And you will remember the American revolutionary cry, 'No taxation without representation.' You're a revolutionary, you accept that principle.
People below the age of 16 pay tax if they earn enough income. That's the reality in our society. So, are we arguing that a one-year-old who happens to have an income that is in excess of the tax threshold ought to have the vote? It's a preposterous argument, frankly.
The point I'm making is that we are being inconsistent as politicians if we legislate to prevent young people from being able to access sunbeds, ingest alcohol and a whole host of other things, and nobody in this Chamber appears to be proposing that we ought to lower the age for those things to 16, then I think that we have taken sensible decisions in order to protect them because they're insufficiently mature. And I think it's the right thing in order to have this age of consistency at 18. That's my own personal view, and that's why I'm moving these amendments today.
Before I talk about the amendments I want to move, I think 16-year-olds should get the vote, but I have to say—[Interruption.] Oh no, you really should have waited. You really should have waited, because there's a sting in this tail, because I think the age at which people accede to universal political rights is a very important principle to set, and it could be set quite reasonably at 18.
I think there are great advantages in setting it at 16, but I really found the connection to women suffrage strained and unhelpful, because we're talking about a really important principle here, and I think 16 to 18-year-olds would allow us to focus on a lot of education issues, a lot of care issues—looked-after children, for instance—and many parts of the political debate—future generations, for instance—and the way infrastructure is developed, and that, I think, is really, really important. The arguments for 16 and 17-year-olds voting I think are strong enough without reducing other Members who are advancing their views with coherency, even if I don't agree with them. Certainly, people under 16 do pay tax; value added tax is a very substantial part of our tax revenue, and it has to be paid on those purchases that attract it, whatever your age.
I have three amendments in this group, Deputy Llywydd, namely amendments 3, 4 and 43. Amendment 3 and, consequentially, amendment 43, would insert on the face of the Bill a duty for the Welsh Government to issue statutory guidance to all secondary schools, including colleges, on how to educate and inform on the changes to the voting age. This was extensively talked about at Stages 1 and 2, but I'm still unsatisfied with the Welsh Government's response, which is basically, 'This sort of thing will happen anyway because they do political education so well'. I couldn't put the argument any better than my colleague Andrew R.T. Davies did at Stage 2—that if you do support the changes to the franchise, you should also vote for this amendment and ensure that the curriculum will inform and prepare our young citizens to exercise their democratic right then established. It would not be healthy for our democracy if this substantial change is implemented without such educational support, because nearly this entire age group will be in an educational setting.
If I may quote Jess Blair, who said at Stage 1,
'At the moment, I think political education is relatively poor and, as a general population, I think we're relatively disengaged in devolved politics, in particular. So, political education, for me, and the extension of the franchise, is an opportunity to do things differently, and it's an opportunity to ensure that this generation of young people...will be much more informed than the current population.'
And I have to say, I think that's very wise advice. We are facing a crisis of citizenship, and at least we can prepare our new citizens with full knowledge of the sort of world that they'll inherit if active citizenship is not taken seriously.
So, I do think that this momentous change, which I welcome, should attract this duty on the Government in terms of what they do in setting statutory guidance for the curriculum. And I must say, the diversity of settings that my amendment would cover means that those in education and training would also—outside the school setting, inevitably—be supported in this way, and encouraged to exercise their democratic rights. And we can go beyond, with a more imaginative approach, simply outlining democratic structures and formal process in the education, and actually engage and inform young people about the issues that really matter to them. We can ensure that young people have opportunities to learn about a full range of political opinions in a non-partisan way. Furthermore, we can also ensure, by doing this, that this political education is delivered by teachers and educators who have themselves received high-quality training in order to ensure that citizenship education is taken seriously, and avoids both political bias and the perception of political bias.
If I can turn to my other amendments, these I introduced for the first time at this stage, and I think the only other amendment that's introduced for the first time is amendment 4. The reason I'm doing this is that if we do create this duty, then I think it's appropriate that we also have the ability to include it in post-legislative scrutiny. So, that's what my second amendment would do. The one area of post-legislative scrutiny that now the Counsel General proposes in his amendment 164, which I do welcome—I think it's a great improvement to the Bill to have brought that amendment on post-legislative scrutiny—doesn't actually cover this point of education because, obviously, at the minute, alas, you don't believe in the duty, unless I've just managed to persuade you. Therefore, it would cover that gap should the Assembly create this duty.
I do think, if I can just say, in general, Dirprwy Lywydd, that post-legislative scrutiny, I think, should attach to all significant Bills and certainly to constitutional ones. I don't think we lose anything when we revisit legislation and examine how it has actually been put into operation and what some of the practical effects that may not have been anticipated were, and, particularly when we're dealing with constitutional issues, I think there is a real need to do that. To practise what I preach, if we do create this duty, then, I think that should be fully covered in post-legislative scrutiny also, and I urge Members to support my amendments.
Thank you. Can I now call the Counsel General?
Deputy Presiding Officer, amendments 100 to 126 from Darren Millar all seek to remove from the Bill the provisions which enfranchise of 16 and 17-year-olds and the administrative provisions necessary to give effect to the enfranchisement. They strike at the heart of the Bill in trying to do so, and I invite Members to reject these amendments because they remove one of the key aims of this Bill, which Welsh Government shares with the Commission.
In relation to amendment 3 and 4 and the duty on secondary schools to promote awareness, I share the intent behind the amendments, that we provide young people with the information in a rich context that they require to make these informed decisions. The question is how we go about achieving that, and the new curriculum arrangements seek to allow for a broadening of learning and supporting settings and schools to be more flexible in their approaches, and to provide practitioners with greater agency in order to be able to do that in a way that is creative. And through the humanities area of learning and experience, learners will develop an understanding of the historical, geographical, political and other issues that are so essential in the process of being an engaged citizen. We are hopeful and confident that the new curriculum will help to develop a generation of politically engaged and informed young people who are ethical and informed citizens of Wales and the world. And, therefore, in that context, I'd ask Members to reject those amendments.
Thank you. Can I call the Llywydd?
I outlined at Stage 2 that legislative proposals to lower the voting age had been a long time coming. Through a series of votes in this Chamber since May 2013, I feel that we are now committed to the young people of Wales to give the vote to those of 16 and 17 years of age by 2021, and that we do now have to achieve that on their behalf. In October of last year, you'll remember that the Assembly agreed to allow the Assembly Commission to introduce this Bill that would extend the franchise for Assembly elections to those of 16 and 17 years of age.
This is not to say that I don't recognise some of the concerns that Members have expressed about some of these proposals. One concern that was raised by Members in Stage 2, and we've heard it again this afternoon, was the inconsistencies in the different ages that we associate with adulthood. In response to this, it's worth reiterating, perhaps, that the expert panel had concluded that there simply isn't a single age at which a young person takes on the responsibilities and rights of an adult citizen. Darren Millar was right in one regard: from birth, all of us are eligible to pay certain taxes, and we can be held criminally responsible at the age of 10. At 16, we can change our names and, at 17, we can hold a licence to drive a car. This makes comparisons between the ages associated with different responsibilities a subjective process. For instance, one of the concerns raised at Stage 2, and again by Darren Millar this afternoon, was that a 16-year-old will be able to vote under this legislation but will not be able to enter a tanning booth or to buy alcohol until they're 18 years of age. However, public health arguments are what underpin setting the age at 18, not to permit anybody from going into tanning booths or to buy alcohol. They're not arguments that relate to an individual's rights as a citizen, and so they are very different in nature.
There's a wide variety of arguments for supporting the lowering of the voting age. I continue to be of the opinion that lowering the voting age to 16 will empower young people at 16 and 17 to vote at Welsh general elections, giving them a voice on decisions that will define their future. It will help to nurture good citizenship in young people and will give an impetus to improve citizenship education. I very much hope that this is an investment in the future of our democracy. It's possible that lowering the voting age may also increase engagement in voting over the longer term, and there is encouraging evidence to suggest that an earlier experience of voting will lead to individuals maintaining that habit.
It also builds on the work that we have done to establish the first Welsh Youth Parliament in this place, and I'm very pleased to say that many of them are fantastic ambassadors for the votes at 16 campaign. Members opposed amendments to remove these provisions at Stage 2, and I urge you to do so again today by rejecting amendments 100 to 126 from Darren Millar.
I turn now to other issues in regard to education and awareness raising. During our discussions at Stage 2, I highlighted the importance of the lowering of the voting age being accompanied by appropriate political and citizenship education, and by public awareness raising. It's appropriate here to refer to the excellent work done by the Youth Parliament, and, since our last meeting on this Bill, the Youth Parliament has published its committee report on life skills in the curriculum. It's important to look at the findings. It found that only 10 per cent of young people had been taught political education up to the age of 18. It expressed disappointment at these low figures in light of our proposals to change the voting age, and suggested that this reflects the lack of confidence teachers and schools in general have in teaching this important subject. So, it's important that we make a step change in this regard within our schools, and it’s the Welsh Government's responsibility to ensure that educational resources are made available to schools and that there is good provision within the curriculum, whether delivered by teachers or by specialist external organisations such as proposed by the Welsh Youth Parliament. It was wonderful to see the Minister, Kirsty Williams, and also the Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee, Lynne Neagle, discussing this report from the Youth Parliament in the Parliament's last meeting a few weeks ago in this Chamber.
So, there is work to do, and we are very aware as an Assembly Commission, and also Welsh Government and other partners, of the work that is to be done in introducing this legislation to ensure that we work together to prepare the resources needed by our young people to educate them about this new right for them, and to prepare and collaborate with our Youth Parliament to ensure that the materials to be provided, the work that we are doing to prepare our young people, and the engagement, has a contribution from the Youth Parliament, and others, in a way that targets resources at the appropriate age.
With regard to post-legislative scrutiny, if the Assembly does determine that a duty to provide education and awareness raising is necessary, then it may also be considered whether it's appropriate to provide a mechanism to facilitate post-implementation scrutiny of this duty, as provided for by amendment 4 from David Melding. The Assembly Commission will welcome such scrutiny of this Bill and intends to evaluate its own effectiveness in implementing those aspects of the legislation for which it will be responsible.
Finally, the technical amendment in my name is amendment 86, and that proposes a minor improvement to the drafting of section 26 in the Welsh version of the Bill alone.
Thank you. I call on Darren Millar to reply to the debate.
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Obviously, I think there is a great deal of consensus in the Chamber around the extension of the franchise and I appreciate that and we've tested the view of the Assembly before. But I do find it quite bizarre that we're not having a wider discussion about those ages of responsibility. I appreciate the Llywydd made some reference in her contribution to the debate on this issue about the varying ages of responsibility for all sorts of different things, and I do think that that's something we need to return to as an Assembly at some point in the future when we consider children and young people and where those boundaries might lie.
I listened carefully to the remarks of the Counsel General in relation to David Melding's amendment. I think David made a very powerful case about the need for high-quality citizenship education in order to promote participation in our democracy, and I recognise that people have accepted that argument. What I don't understand is that if you accept that argument, why are you then resistant to allowing and enabling some statutory requirements for guidance to be issued to our secondary schools in order to deliver on your stated policy objective and aim? So, I would urge Members to support David Melding's amendments. I would certainly urge Members to think again about this issue of extending the franchise when people quite clearly, from the Youth Parliament's own research, feel ill-equipped and unprepared for the duty that they might hold at age 16 and 17 in having the opportunity to vote.
And I will say this: in spite of my opposition to extending the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds, I have led for the Conservatives on this issue of extending opportunities for young people to engage in citizenship and engage in the workings of this Parliament over the years. I can remember leading the debate that made the calls for the establishment of a youth Parliament, and I was delighted that the Llywydd picked up on that and that all parties in this Chamber got behind that particular proposal. So, it's not that I'm against the participation of young people in the life of this institution, in helping to shape our views, it's just that I don't think that it's always the best case to simply extend the franchise in order to give them that opportunity. Young people can engage in many different ways. If you look at Greta Thunberg, not even a citizen of this country, who could argue, in this Chamber, that she's not had the opportunity to influence even our politics here in this Chamber in the declaration of a climate emergency, for example? So, there are ways to engage without having to extend the franchise and I would urge people to support my amendments.
Thank you. If amendment 102 is not agreed, amendment 100 will fall. The question is that amendment 102 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object. Therefore, we'll proceed to a vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment, 10, no abstentions, 45 against, therefore amendment 102 is not agreed and amendment 100 falls.
David Melding, amendment 3.
Thank you. The question is that amendment 3 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object. Okay, so we'll move to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 19, no abstentions, 36 against. Therefore, amendment 3 is not agreed.
David Melding, amendment 4.
Not moved.
Not moved. Thank you.