AGE OF

ELECTORAL MAJORITY

NOVEMBER 2003

PREPARED FOR:

THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

REPORT PREPARED BY:

Martin Boon Head of ICM government research

2

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

Table of contents Page

1. TABLE OF CONTENTS 3

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

3. METHODOLOGY 6

4. BACKGROUND TO THE SURVEY 8

5. MAIN REPORT 9

5.1 Legal Minimum Ages 9 5.2 Unprompted Preferred Age for Voting 11 5.3 Prompted Preferred Age for Voting 12 5.4 Reasons Why the Should Remain At 18 Years 13 5.5 Reasons Why the Voting Age Should Be Lowered to 16 Years 14 5.6 Age of Candidacy 15 5.7 Differential Voter And Candidacy Age 16 5.8 Identical Voter and Candidate Age 16 5.9 A Consistent Age of Voting 17 5.10 A Consistent Age for Standing As a Candidate 18

6. CONCLUSIONS 19

7. TOP LINE RESULTS 20

3

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

2. Executive Summary

⇒ ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1033 aged 18+ by telephone on 19-20 November 2003. An additional booster sample of 234 interviews with 15-19 year olds was conducted on 25-26 November – these results are reported separately and the findings below are based on the 1,089 sample aged 18+ unless otherwise stated (correct to within +/-2.72% at the 95% confidence level).

⇒ In general, people have a fairly good impression of the minimum that applies to various types of activity. In particular, four in five (83%) know that you have to be 18 before you can vote. Ironically, the groups most likely to incorrectly state the voting age are those who have most recently passed the threshold, with 13% of those aged 18-24 and 17% of those 25-34 saying that the age is actually 16 years rather than 18 years. Fifteen year olds show a low level of awareness, with 24% thinking the voting age is 16 years, but the proportion falls dramatically among those aged 16 (6%) and 17 (7%) years.

⇒ It is also the case that of all the types of activity presented to respondents, the age at which people can be election candidates is the one that most people got wrong. As the table below shows, only 36% correctly stated 21 years, with the remainder either getting it wrong (56%) or not knowing (8%). The table below shows the proportion who correctly stated the age that applies for each type of activity:

Correct Age % Saying Correct Age Vote at elections 18 83% Gambling in a betting 18 67% shop or casino Leave FT education 16 65% Smoke 16 55% Drive a car 17 53% Drive a bus or lorry 21 50% Stand as a candidate in 21 36% an election

⇒ The age at which it is thought that people should be able to vote produced a remarkable finding. The average (to one decimal place) is 18.0 years. There is a very slight tendency for younger people to think that voting age should be lower (average age among those 18-24 is 17.7 years and 25-34 is 17.5 years), although there are no statistically significant variations across the age bands.

⇒ If forced to choose between a minimum legal age for voting of 16 years or 18 years, three-quarters would choose the status quo. Overall, 78% say that the

4

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

minimum voting age should remain at 18 years, with only one in five (22%) saying it should be lowered to 16 years. However, younger people disproportionately think that the age should be lowered to 16 years (33% of those aged 18-24 compared to only 5% of those 65+). The older you become, the more likely you are to think the age should remain at 18 years.

⇒ Those people who want the voting age to remain at 18 years suggest that insufficient life experience (33%) is the chief reason, followed by immaturity at 16 (30%) – although the latter argument is not something that 15-19 year olds’ mention to such a degree (only 22% do so). Some of this younger group, however, do admit to disinterest interested at that age (13%).

⇒ A minority of the population want the age lowered to 16 years. They think that this age group are part of society and also have valid opinions at 16, with adults aged 18+ more likely to think the former rather than the latter (vice-versa for those aged 15-19).

⇒ When it comes to the minimum age at which people can stand as election candidates, more people are inclined to think that it should be kept at 21 years (32%) or should be higher than this (33%), than think it should be 18 years (23%).

⇒ Indeed, 81% agree (either ‘strongly’ 58% or ‘tend to agree’ 23%) that the minimum age should be higher for a candidate than a voter because more experience of life is needed to be a candidate. Older people are particularly inclined to think this way (88% ‘net’ agreement among those 65+ compared to 76% net agreement among those 18-24).

⇒ However, when respondents were prompted with the statement “if you are old enough to vote, you are old enough to be a candidate” the level of ‘net’ disagreement only reached 58%. Given that 81% previously felt that candidates needed to be older, it clearly did not take much for almost one in four to change their mind, or at least to be sympathetic with both sides of the argument.

⇒ When it comes to the voting age across elections, there is universal agreement that there should be consistency. Overall, 94% agree that the age at which people can vote should be the same for all elections. There is very little divergence on this issue across all demographic variables.

⇒ Not quite as many (88%) agree that the age at which people can stand as candidates should be the same across all elections, but the results are very conclusive none the less. Younger people (83% of those 18-24) are slightly less inclined to agree than older groups (91% of those 65+).

5

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

3. Methodology

ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1033 adults aged 18+ by telephone on 19th-20th November 2003. An additional boost sample of 234 interviews with 15- 19 year olds was conducted on 25-26th November. All interviews were conducted across the and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults, with the exception of 201 boost interviews with 15-17 year olds, which was left un-weighted. The results are correct to within +/-2.72% at the 95% confidence level.

It should be remembered at all times that a sample and not the entire population has been interviewed. Consequently, all results are subject to sampling tolerances, which mean that not all differences are statistically significant.

We can, however, predict the variation between the sample results and the ‘true’ values (if everyone in the population had been interviewed) from knowledge of the size of the samples on which the results are based and the number of times answers are given. The confidence with which we can make this prediction is usually chosen to be 95% - that is, the chances are 95 times out of 100 that the ‘true’ value will fall within a specified range. The table below illustrates the predicted ranges for different sample sizes and the percentage results at the 95% confidence level.

SAMPLE SIZE SAMPLING TOLERENCES APPLICABLE TO %’S AT OR NEAR 10% OR 30% OR 70% 50% 90%+ / - + / - + / - 100 interviews 5.88% 8.98% 9.8% 250 interviews 3.72% 5.68% 6.2% 500 interviews 2.63% 4.02% 4.38% 1000 interviews 1.86% 2.84% 3.1% 1,100 interviews 1.77% 2.71% 2.95%

For example, with a sample size of 1,100 interviews where 50% (the worst case scenario as far as tolerances are concerned) give a particular answer, we can be 95% certain that the ‘true’ value will fall within the range of 2.95% from the sample result.

When results are compared between separate groups within a sample (say, between men and women), different results may be obtained. The difference may be ‘real’ or it may occur by chance (because a sample rather than the entire population has been interviewed). To test if the difference is a real one, i.e. if it is ‘statistically significant’, we again have to know the size of the samples, the % giving a certain answer and the degree of confidence chosen. If we assume the

6

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

95% confidence level again, the differences between the results of two separate groups must be greater than the values given in the table below:

SAMPLE SIZES TO DIFFERENCES REQUIRED TO BE BE COMPARED STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT AT OR NEAR 10% OR 30% OR 50% 90%+ / - 70%+ / - + / - 100 and 100 8.3% 12.7% 13.9% 200 and 200 5.9% 8.9% 9.8% 500 and 500 3.7% 5.7% 6.2% 1000 and 1000 2.6% 4.0% 4.4%

SOCIAL CLASS DEFINITIONS Most market research projects classify the population into social grades, usually on the basis of the Market Research Society occupational groupings (MRS, 1991). They are defined as follows:

Professionals such as doctors, solicitors or dentists, chartered people like architects; fully qualified people with a large degree of responsibility such as A. senior civil servants, senior business executives and high ranking grades within the armed forces. Retired people, previously grade A, and their widows. People with very senior jobs such as university lecturers, heads of local B. government departments, middle management in business organisations, bank managers, police inspectors, and upper grades in the armed forces. All others doing non-manual jobs, including nurses, technicians, pharmacists, C1. salesmen, publicans, clerical workers, police sergeants and middle ranks of the armed forces. Skilled manual workers, foremen, manual workers with special qualifications C2. such as lorry drivers, security officers and lower grades of the armed forces. Semi-skilled and unskilled manual workers, including labourers and those D. serving apprenticeships. Machine minders, farm labourers, lab assistants and postmen. Those on the lowest levels of subsistence including all those dependent upon E. the state long-term. Casual workers, and those without a regular income.

In some parts of this report, ‘net’ figures have been used. These are usually two different %’s which have been aggregated for convenience, where it is appropriate to do so. For example, where 20% ‘strongly’ agree and 15% ‘tend’ to agree, the net becomes 35% who agree.

In all the charts and tables that follow, percentages that do not add to 100% may be the result of computer rounding of raw numbers into percentage figures.

* If the asterisk symbol is present in any chart or table that follows, it indicates that a particular answer was given by at least one respondent, but the aggregation of all such answers was insufficient for them to round up to 1%. 7

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

4. Background To The Survey

To vote in United Kingdom elections an individual must be at least 18 years old, in accordance with the Representation of the People Act 1983. There is, however, a difference when it comes to the age at which an individual can stand as a candidate in those elections, where the current minimum age stipulated (in various legal provisions) is 21 years.

Given that participation in elections among the youngest members of society has been very low in recent years (only 39% of those aged 18-24 years are thought to have voted in the 2001 General Election), many people have suggested that now is the time to change rules applying to the minimum voting and candidacy ages, in the hope of engaging young people more openly and thus helping to assimilate them into political processes and structures. It is argued that lowering the voting age would provide a clear statement to the youngest sections of society that their views are being taken seriously. Indeed, three independent commissions have recently recommended lowering the voting age and/or candidacy age for local elections – the Kerley Working Group in , the Commission on Local Governance in and the Sunderland Commission in .

However, others argue that most voters under 18 are insufficiently mature to use electoral rights responsibly, and are more likely to be influenced by others. Given these opposing views, the independent Electoral Commission published a consultation paper How old is old enough? in July 2003, seeking stakeholder views on the preferred ages for voting and candidacy. As part of the consultation process, ICM Research was commissioned to undertake quantitative research among representative samples of the UK population aged 15+, which examined precisely those issues briefly mentioned above. This report provides detailed feedback on the research results.

8

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

5. Main Report

5.1 Legal Minimum Ages In the United Kingdom, there is no single legal , with young people able to participate in different activities or acts at various ages. In order to understand how far people in the UK understand this, in the first instance they were asked what they thought the minimum ages are for various activities. The chart below shows that many people do in fact have a fairly good impression of the minimum ages, particularly in terms of being able to vote – but not in terms of being able to stand as a candidate.

Overall, four in five (80%) are aware of the fact that you currently have to be 18 years of age before you can vote – easily the largest proportion who spontaneously mention any correct minimum age.

MINIMUM AGE TO LEGALLY….. 3 3 0 0 0 0 Correct age Incorrect age Don't know er 2 er 2 b b 100% 0

m 1 m 3 2 4 5 e e 8 v v 90% 16 No No 30 – – 80% 33 41 47 on on 45 70% ssi ssi 60% 60

50% Commi Commi 40% 83 toral toral 67 65 30% ec ec 55 53 50 El El 20% – –

32 h h 10% arc arc se se 0% Vote in Gamble Leave FT Smoke Drive a car Drive bus Stand as elections education or lorry candidate ICM Re ICM Re Q1. What do you think is the minimum age someone is legally able to do each of the following activities in the UK? BASE: All respondents 18+ (1,089)

There are few substantive demographic variations on this, but it is true that 15-17 year olds are less able (67%) than others to correctly identify the age at which they can vote. However, this rises to 81% among all 18-24 year olds’, which logically indicates that once they pass the age of majority they become aware of it.

However, while the public are disproportionately able to identify the age at which people can vote in elections, they are disproportionately unable to identify the

9

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

correct age at which people can stand as candidates in those elections. Indeed, the proportion (32%) that correctly calls the age as 21 years is the lowest of all types of activity enquired about. Indeed, slightly more (36%) think the age is actually 18 years, while a sizable one in six (17%) think that candidates need to be 22 or older.

The proportion who get the candidacy age right are very much from the older end of the age spectrum, with 39% of those aged 55+ getting it right compared to only 18% of 15-17 year olds’ and 25% of 18-24 year olds’.

The table below shows that there are some other interesting differences between those aged 15-17 years and those 18+, in terms of the proportions who correctly identify the minimum legal age for each type of activity. In general, for those activities that young people may have an interest in (even if they are not yet legally old enough to actually do it), they are more aware than the population as a whole as to the correct minimum legal age. This applies particularly to smoking (68% 15- 19 vs 55% 18+) and driving a car (61% vs. 53%). It does not apply to driving a bus or lorry, or indeed to standing as an election candidate.

Correct Age % 18+ Saying %15-17 years Correct Age Saying Correct Age Vote at elections 18 83% 67% Gambling in a betting 18 67% 68% shop or casino Leave FT education 16 65% 68% Smoke 16 55% 68% Drive a car 17 53% 61% Drive a bus or lorry 21 50% 30% Stand as a candidates in 21 32% 18% an election

For all of the non-election activities, a majority of the population is able to specify the correct minimum legal age, with up to two in three correct for gambling (67%) and leaving full time education (65%); just over half for smoking (55%), driving a car (53%) or driving a bus or lorry (50%).

10

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

5.2 Unprompted Preferred Age for Voting When asked the age at which people should be able to cast a vote in elections, two in three (64%) think that the status quo position of 18 years is the right age. Of those people who would prefer the voting age to be 18 rather than 16 years, three quarters (77%) do know that the legal age is actually 18 years. However, only one in five (20%) of those who would prefer it to be 16 years correctly and spontaneously specified the correct legal age of 18. In short, most of those people who would like the age to be lowered don’t actually know what the legal minimum age currently is!

AGE SHOULD BE ABLE TO VOTE IN ELECTIONS? 3 03 0 0 20 2 r r 16 years 17 years 18 years 19+ years Other/DK e e b m mb MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = e 18.0 17.4 17.7 17.5 17.8 18.1 18.5 18.4 v

o 100% 2 0 11111

N 6 Nove 14 9 10 90% 13 16 – – 21 20

3 n n 80% o o i i s s 70% s s 60 60% 52 64 64 mmi mmi 50% 64 63 o o 67 69 l C l C 40% a a r r 30% 3 o o 6 t t 3 2 c c 20% 3 e

e 4 l l 30 E E 25 23 23 10% 18 17 2 4 – – 8

0% 5 h h c c r r s t 19 24 34 44 54 64 5+ a a n 6 e e de 15- 18- 25- 35- 45- 55- n s s e e po s

R re R ll A ICM ICM Q2. At what age do you think people SHOULD be able to vote in elections? BASE: All respondents (1,089), Booster 15-19 (279)

As the chart shows, overall there is a clear preference across all age groups for the voting age to be 18 years, with even a majority (52%) of 15-19 year olds supporting this case. However, the proportion does fall below a majority amongst those aged 16 (43%) or 17 years (44%). Clearly, those people fast approaching the age at which they can vote would already like to be able to do so, but once past it, their views swing back in the opposite direction – two in three (64%) of both 18 year olds’ and 19 year olds’ think the voting age should remain at 18 years.

Remarkably, the ‘mean vote age’ calculation arrived at for all adults is exactly 18.0 years. This falls to 17.4 among those aged 15-19 and rises to a high of 18.5 years among those between the ages of 55-64 years.

11

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

5.3 Prompted Preferred Age for Voting It was explained to respondents that The Electoral Commission is reviewing the age at which people should be allowed to vote, and they were asked to decide between lowering it to 16 years or keeping it at 18. There is an emphatic majority in favour of the latter option, with 78% wanting things to stay as they are and only 22% choosing the 16 years option. With the exception of age (see below the chart), there are few discriminating variables on this issue – although it is the case that ethnic minorities (73%) are slightly less inclined for the status quo than the white population (78%) as are those who rarely or never vote (67%) compared to those who do so regularly (83%).

16 YEARS VS. 18 YEARS 03 03 Lowered to 16 Kept at 18 20 r er 20 e b b m m e e 100% v v o No N 90% – –

n n 80% o o i i s 70% ss 54 62 is 67 73 m 60% 78 80 mmi 88 o 94 50% Com C l a ral r 40% o to t c

e 30% ec l El E 20% – – 35 38

33 h h 27 c c 10% 22

r 19 r a a 11 e e 5

s 0% s e e All 15-19 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ R R

M Q3. As you may know, the independent Electoral Commission is currently reviewing the age at which ICM IC people should be allowed to vote. If the choice came down to it do you think the minimum voting age should be lowered to 16 years or kept at it’s present 18 years? BASE: All respondents (1,089), Booster 15-19 (279)

When it comes to age, once again it can be seen that the older you are the more likely it becomes that you prefer the voting age to remain at 18 years. Overall, 94% of those aged 65+ think this way, with the proportion falling steadily to ‘only’ 54% of all those aged 15-19. However, within this lowest age band there is major variation in response, with a plurality but not a majority (48%) of 16 year olds’ and 17 year olds’ (47%) in favour of it being kept at 18. This is not the case for 15 year olds’, who are split down the middle (52% vs 48% just in favour of keeping it at 18) or 18 and 19 year olds’ - a much bigger proportion of whom want the voting age to remain at 18 years (69% and 70% respectively).

The table below shows how young people views vary by single year:

12

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

AGE % in favour of % in favour of keeping voting lowering to 16 % Don’t Know age at 18 years years 15 years 52% 48% -% 16 years 48% 35% 17% 17 years 47% 27% 26% 18 years 69% 29% 2% 19 years 70% 30% -%

15-16 years 50% 42% 8% 15-17 years 49% 37% 14% 15-19 years 54% 35% 11%

18+ 78% 22% *%

5.4 Reasons why the voting age should remain at 18 years If three quarters (78%) of the population want the voting age to remain at 18, we might speculate that they hold some solid views on why this should be the case. Yet this is not really true. As the chart shows, there are a number of spontaneous reasons provided, none of which is held by more than four in ten members of the population.

WHY KEEP IT AT 18 YEARS? 3 03 0 0 0 2 2 r r e b mbe m e

v Not enough life 36 experience Nove No 33 – –

n n Not mature enough at 22 o i 16 30 s ssio s i i Too young to make 12 mm mm decisions 13 Co l Co l 3 a a Still children r r 9

ecto Not interested at that 13 Electo El age 4 15-19 – –

18+ h h

c Leaves time to develop 3 r

a views arc 2 se se e e 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 R R ICM ICM Q4. Why do you think the voting age should be lowered to 16? BASE: All who think should be kept at 18 years (847), booster 15-19 (152)

One in three (33%) think that 16 year olds don’t have enough life experience (as do 36% of 15-19 year olds in fact), while a further 30% (22%, 15-19) simply think

13

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

that people do not have sufficient maturity at 16. One in eight (13%) thinks that 16 is not old enough to make political decisions, but intriguingly, 13% of 15-19 year olds’ say they are not interested enough at that age, which is not something that older people think of particularly (4%) as a reason to keep the voting age where it is.

5.5 Reasons why the voting age should be lowered to 16 years It has been established that a minority, one in five (22%) does want the age to be lowered to sixteen years, (rising to 35% among 15-19 year olds). As the chart shows, the main reason for this is interchangeable depending on the age group by which we analyse the data, but irrespective of that, there only appear to be three main strands of thought on why the age should be lowered.

WHY LOWER IT TO 16 YEARS? 3 03 20 200 r r e e vemb

o 36 They are still part of N Novemb society – – 46

n o i ion s s 43 They have valid views and opinions 28 mmis mmis l Co l Co a a 8 r r Mature enough at 16 o o 24 ect ect l l E E 15-19 – – 11 18+ Other ch ch

r 5 a sear se e e 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 R R M IC ICM Q4. Why do you think the voting age should be lowered to 16? BASE: All who think should be lowered to 16 years (314), boost 15-19 (97)

The first of these relates to the fact that young people under 18 are considered to be part of society. The proportion supporting this proposition rises to 46% among all adults, but falls back to one in three (36%) among 15-19 year olds - who are themselves more convinced (43%) by the idea that the views and opinions they hold are valid and perhaps should be treated on an equal basis to the opinions held by their elders. However, their elders are not so easily persuaded that young people do hold valid opinions, given that only one in four (28%) thinks along the same lines.

14

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

The only other important theme to emerge focuses on the maturity of young people. One in four adults (24%) think that 16 year olds’ are mature enough to form political opinions, an idea that young people themselves do not mention as often, given that only 8% of those aged 15-19 spontaneously admitted this was the case.

5.6 Age of candidacy The age at which people are currently able to stand as election candidates is 21 years, but only 32% of the population is aware of this, with an identical number (32%) thinking that it SHOULD be 21 years. More people however(33%), think it should be raised to 22 years or beyond than think (23%) it should be lowered to a par with the voting age of 18 years. This is especially the case as far as members of ethnic minorities are concerned (42%) and those who are not currently employed (40%). The mean age at which people think people they should be able to stand as candidates is, however, 20.4 years.

AGE SHOULD BE ABLE TO STAND AS CANDIDATE? 3 3 0 0

16-17 years 18 years 19-20 years 21 years 22+ years er 20 er 20 b b m m MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = MEAN = 20.4 19.2 19.8 19.6 20.2 20.5 20.1 21.1 ve ve 100%

No 6 No 90%

– 18 – 21

27 n

n 33 80% 33

o 22 o 45 i i 50 s s 70% s s 27 60% 8 30 mmi mmi 33 50% o o 32 3 35 5 l C l C 40% a a 4 38 r r 30% 4 39 33 o o 37 6 t t 30 20% ec ec 26 l l 23 22 2 5 E E 10% 14 – – 8 10

6 6 0% 4 4 2 1 0 h h c c r r s 9 4 4 4 t 1 2 34 4 54 6 5+ a a n e 6 e e 15- 18- 25- 35- 45- 55- nd s s e e po s e

R r R l Al ICM ICM Q5. At what age do you think people SHOULD be able to stand as a candidate in an election? BASE: All respondents (1,296), boost 15-19 (279)

Once again, a key determinant is age. As the chart above demonstrates, half (50%) of those aged 65+ think that candidates should be 22+, a proportion that falls consistently with respondent age. Similarly, the proportion who think it should be lowered to 18 years reaches its’ peak at 15-19 years (39%) and falls consistently as respondent age increases (with the exception of 19 year olds, 33% of whom think

15

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

this should be the case), to the point where only 10% of 65+’s think it should apply. A consistent feature of this research is the wide variation in attitude by single year of age among the youngest cohort. This also applies to candidacy age, where over half (52%) of 15 year olds’ think it should be lowered to 18 years, but the proportion then falls as the table below demonstrates:

AGE % who think candidacy age should be lowered to 18 years 15 years 52% 16 years 40% 17 years 34% 18 years 31% 19 years 33%

18-34 34% 35-54 24% 55+ 12%

5.7 Differential Voter and Candidate Ages There is strong agreement that “the minimum age should be higher for a candidate than a voter because more experience of life is needed to be a candidate”. Overall four in five (81%) think that this is the case, which perhaps fits in with the findings set out above. Not only this, but the strength of agreement is high with six in ten (58%) agreeing strongly and one in four (23%) tending to agree. Only one in seven people (15%) disagree in total, with only 6% disagreeing strongly and 9% tending to disagree.

The level of agreement is fairly consistent across all demographic variables, at least in the sense that a clear majority exists in all cases. It is even the case that over half (52%) of those who previously said candidacy age should be 18 years rather than 21 agree with the statement! Some might argue that this presents something of a contradiction, but of course, while a few people might agree with the statement as it stands they might also agree in stronger terms to an alternative outcome for a different reason. In practice they might think that candidates should be older but in theory they might like the idea of age equality. There is also an alternative explanation – a number might well think that the voter age should be lowered to sixteen, in which case there is no contradiction at all.

5.8 Identical Voter and Candidate Age Indeed, when presented with a subsequent statement, that “the minimum age for a candidate should be the same as for voting, because if you are old enough to vote you are old enough to be a candidate” a majority disagreed (58%) - but not to the extent that one might have thought given the results on the previous statement. In fact, over one in three (39%) agree with this, so it is clearly the case that a sizable number believe that there is some truth to both arguments.

16

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

Those who do agree to this tend to be more male (44%) than female (33%) and as expected, younger rather than older. The table below again demonstrates how much more inclined younger people are to think differently from their elders, even if older groups all think alike on this issue from about the age of 35 years.

AGE % who agree that voting and candidacy age should be the same 15 years 62% 16 years 51% 17 years 40% 18 years 62% 19 years 48%

18-34 49% 35-54 35% 55+ 33%

As the table shows, 18 year olds’ might feel a little indignant or hard done by with regard to this matter. Overall, two thirds (62%) think that candidacy and voting age should be the same, which (presumably) they think should be 18 rather than 21. Given that only 48% of 19 year olds think this way, a large proportion evidently drop their indignation over time.

Interestingly, it is also true that those who are not interested in politics and those who don’t know that the current voting age is 18 disproportionately agree (42% and 44% respectively) with the statement “the minimum age for a candidate should be the same as for voting, because if you are old enough to vote you are old enough to be a candidate”. This might suggest that (at least) a weak correlation exists between political ignorance or apathy and not turning out to vote in elections – i.e. that some may fail to vote once they are permitted to in frustration or protest at not having been able to exercise their vote at an earlier age. However, the hypothesis fails somewhat when it is considered that an identical number of regular voters (36%) and non-voters (36%) agree.

5.9 A consistent age of voting? An overwhelming majority of people (94%) agree that the “age at which people can vote should be the same for all elections”, with a majority (56%) agreeing strongly. This concept is pretty much sacrosanct for all, with agreement only falling to 87% among BME’s. It remains above this in all other classifications of respondent.

However, a relatively large proportion of 16 years olds and 17 year olds don’t know (17% and 26%), which brings the ‘net’ agreement down to 77% and 69% respectively. However, disagreement amongst these two age groups does not rise above the average 5% threshold, which suggests this is more of an anomaly than

17

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

rejection of the concept. Of the 5% who do disagree, slightly more (3%) tend to agree than strongly disagree (2%).

5.10 A consistent age for standing as a candidate? A vast majority (88%) also agree that it should be the case “that the age at which people can stand as a candidate should be the same for all elections”. The majority may not be quite as high as for the voting age, but is pretty conclusive none-the- less.

Some of the same patterns emerge that were identified in the previous section. Chief among these is a drop to 69% net agreement among black and minority ethnic groups (although it is 80% for 15-19 BME’s). Those aged 16 and 17 years again demonstrate a lower level of agreement (66% and 64% respectively), although mainly because they don’t know rather than disagree.

The following chart summarises the results for each of the four agreement/disagreement statements referred to in sections 5.7-5.10

AGREEMENT STATEMENTS:

003 Agree strongly Tend to agree Neither 2003 2 r r e e Tend to disagree Disagree strongly b b m m e e Candidate age should v v o o be higher than voter 58 23 3 9 6 N N age – –

n n

Candidate age should issio issio 18 20 4 30 27 be same as voter age m m m m o o l C l C a a r r Voter age same across 56 37 132 to to elections c c e e l l E E – –

ch ch Candidate age same 51 38 3 5 3 across elections sear sear

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% M Re M Re IC IC Q6. For each of the following statements do you agree strongly, tend to agree, neither agree nor disagree, tend to disagree or disagree strongly? BASE: All respondents 18+ (1,089), booster 15-19 (279)

18

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

6. Conclusions

These results represent a solid affirmation of the status quo. There may be valid reasons for reducing the voting age but the general public are either unaware of them or rather unimpressed by them. Indeed, a reduction in the voting age could only be justified in this sense by attaching more importance to the wishes of current 16-17 year olds’ than to the views of the public at large, full in the knowledge that those same 16-17 year olds’ may well come to the conclusion in the not too distant future that they would have been too immature or lacking in experience to have used their vote wisely.

Rarely does a research survey produce a truly remarkable statistic. When asked unprompted as to the age that people should be allowed to vote, the distribution of response produced a mean age of 18.0 years. When combined with the finding that (given the choice between 16 or 18 as the age of electoral majority) 78% would choose the latter, the general public give a very clear statement of their views in this survey.

There is, however, dissention when it comes to the age at which people can stand as candidates, but not perhaps, in the way that might have been expected. Rather than bringing the candidacy age down, a narrow plurality would prefer it to be raised. Indeed, there is a clear preference for worldly wise and mature politicians, and few believe that this type of individual can be found amongst the teenage ranks. A cautionary note to this finding is the significant shift in attitude found in response to the question relating to an identical voting age and candidacy age. If it is the case that the general public are susceptible to the argument ‘if you are old enough to vote then you are old enough to stand’, then we might speculate that a concerted and well argued case based on this premise will move overall public opinion.

What is for sure, however, is a public preference for consistency across elections. There is precious little support for foreign models of voting where differential voting age eligibility applies across elections depending on the seniority of the political institution concerned. This also applies to candidacy age.

19

AGE OF ELECTORAL MAJORITY OMNIBUS SAMPLE PLUS BOOST PLUS NORTHERN IRELAND

Q1 What do you think is the minimum age someone is legally able to do each of the following activities in the UK? ROTATE. READ OUT. DO NOT PROMPT ANSWERS.

1 = Vote at elections 2 = Stand as a candidate at an election 3 = Leave full time education 4 = Drive a car 5 = Drive a bus or lorry 6 = Smoke 7 = Gambling in a betting shop or casino

Vote at Stand as a Leave FT Drive a car Drive a bus Smoke Gambling betting elections candidate at education or lorry shop or casino an election 14 or under *% -% 1% -% -% 1% -% 15 years *% -% 4% *% *% 2% *% 16 years 9% 2% 64% 7% *% 55% 4% 17 years 2% 1% 4% 52% 4% 3% 1% 18 years 83% 32% 18% 32% 13% 23% 66% 19 years -% *% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 20 years 1% 3% 1% 2% 6% 1% 3% 21 years 4% 36% 2% 3% 49% 2% 18% 22+ years 1% 18% 3% 2% 22% 1% 4% Any age -% *% 1% *% -% 2% *% Don’t know *% 8% 2% *% 5% 4% 3% Never N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a 7% N/a AVERAGE 17.97 19.99 16.66 17.52 20.58 16.72 18.68

Q2 At what age do you think people SHOULD be able to vote in elections?

13 years or under *% 14 years *% 15 years 1% 16 years 17% 17 years 3% 18 years 65% 19 years *% 20 years 2% 21 years 10% 22+ years 1% Any age *% Don’t know *% AVERAGE 18.0

Q3 As you may know, the independent Electoral Commission is currently reviewing the age at which people should be allowed to vote. If the choice came down to it do you think the minimum voting age should be lowered to 16 years or kept at its present 18 years?

Lowered to 16 years 22% GO TO Q4 Kept at 18 years 78% GO TO Q4 Don’t know *% GO TO Q5

⇒ ASK AS APPROPRIATE Q4 Why do you think the voting age should be lowered to 16 years/kept at 18 years? WRITE IN. PROBE FULLY

They are still part of society = 44% Have valid views and opinions = 31% Mature enough at 16 = 20% Other = 5%

⇒ ASK ALL Q5 At what age do you think people SHOULD be able to stand as a candidate at an election?

13 years or under -% 14 years -% 15 years -% 16 years 3% 17 years *% 18 years 23% 19 years *% 20 years 4% 21 years 32% 22+ years 33% Any age *% Don’t know 3% AVERAGE 20.41

Age of Electoral Majority - November 2003

Q6a For each of the following statements, do agree strongly, tend to agree, neither agree nor disagree, tend to disagree or disagree strongly? ROTATE

AS = 58% The minimum age should be HIGHER for a candidate than a voter TA = 23% because more experience of life is needed to be a candidate. Neither = 4% TD = 9% DS = 6% AS = 18% The minimum age to be a candidate should be the SAME as for TA = 20% voting. Because if you are old enough to vote you are old enough Neither = 3% to be a candidate TD = 31% DS = 28%

Q6b And for each of the following statements, do agree strongly, tend to agree, neither agree nor disagree, tend to disagree or disagree strongly? ROTATE

AS = 56% The age at which people can vote should be the same for all TA = 37% elections Neither = 1% TD = 3% DS = 2% AS = 50% The age at which people can stand as a candidate should be the TA = 38% same for all elections Neither = 3% TD = 5% DS = 3%

Q7 At what age did you first vote in a local or national election. It doesn’t matter if you cannot remember exactly, your best guess will be fine?

18 years 51% 19 years 5% 20 years 7% 21 years 16% 22+ years 12% Never voted 7% Don’t know 3% AVERAGE 19.26

22