Jan Eichhorn

Should the Voting Age be Lowered to 16 for UK Elections

Lowering the voting age would increase youth engagement in politics, says Jan Eichhorn.

Mobilisation through early activation and school engagement – the story from Scotland

ABSTRACT This paper explores the experience of 16–17 year olds participating in the Scottish independence referendum and discusses whether it can be seen as positive or negative considering civic attitudes and participation. Using data from two comprehensive and representative surveys of 14–17 year olds, it engages empirically with claims about young peoples alleged political (dis-)interest and provides qualifications for commonly believed stories of young people as mere recipients of information given to them by parents and teachers. The paper develops a positive view of young peoples engagement in the referendum process and suggests that inputs from parents and schools actually have distinguishable effects on young people, who do not simply ‘follow the lead’ of others uncritically. The analyses suggest that the discussion of political issues in the classroom (rather than the simple delivery of civics-style classes per se) may act as a positive factor in the political socialisation of young people, but suggests that further research is required to examine these effects beyond the specific context of the Scottish independence referendum in particular in relation to questions about whether reducing the voting age to 16 could be expected to generally lead to positive outcomes.

The English Question I: Is EVEL the Answer?

This chapter offers an in-depth look at views held by people in England to a range of governance proposals. The chapter analyses how people in England view several distinct proposals, investigating whether there are differences between particular groups of people. It goes on to consider whether people have a favoured option and whether that option differs across different groups. In addition to exploring preference for governance options, the chapter presents findings on people’s preferred mechanism of making change. The chapter reveals a public open to multiple options for reforming the way that England is governed.

Voting at 16: Lessons from Scotland for the Rest of the UK?

In 2014, 16- and 17-year-olds in Scotland were allowed to vote in the independence referendum. Subsequently, it was decided that 16- and 17-year-olds should be able to vote in Scottish elections. 16 and 17-year-olds in England have not been similarly enfranchised. Using that situation as a form of natural experiment, this chapter considers whether 16 and 17-year-olds in Scotland express different political attitudes and behaviour compared to their counterparts in the rest of the UK. The chapter identifies higher levels of political engagement amongst 16- and 17-year-olds in Scotland and argues that further steps, including in the area of civic education, is required to generate lasting positive change.

The Smith Commission: An Elite-Driven Process

Drawing on an extensive set of elite interviews, this chapter offers insights into the Smith Commission, convened by David Cameron the morning after the Scottish independence referendum to agree a package of new powers for the Scottish Parliament. Exploring the attitudes of politicians, civil servants and civic leaders, the chapter argues that this was an elite-driven process that, whilst technically successful in delivering an outcome by an agreed deadline, was lacking in terms of public engagement and participation.

The English Question II: Elite-Driven Devolution Deals

Drawing on an extensive set of elite interviews with politicians and civil servants at local and national level, this chapter considers the process that led to the announcement of a devolution deal for Greater Manchester in November 2014. The chapter shows how the devolution model has become a template for other deals, marking a significant development in the governance of England. It reconstructs what was an elite-driven process, with a deal negotiated in secret, and poses questions about the democratic legitimacy of that process.