Debate contribution: Voting Age: 16- and 17-year-olds
Debate contribution by Ms Sinéad McLaughlin on .
- MLA
- Ms Sinéad McLaughlin
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 24 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Voting Age: 16- and 17-year-olds
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4644843
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I put on record our strong support for lowering the voting age to 16, and I thank the proposers of the motion and the amendment. To me, from the outset, the biggest reason for lowering the voting age is our young people themselves. Our next generation has ambition in spades for themselves and for Northern Ireland. They care deeply about the world around them and about the biggest social, economic and justice issues of the day. On all progressive causes, they are all too often four or five steps ahead of where our politicians of the day land. Let us not forget that these young people will be forced to live with the consequences of today's decisions and have often known little else but instability in our politics and skyrocketing costs of housing, transport and basic essentials. All those challenges are in the context of an uncertain future, both for this place and for the planet. I do not blame young people who look at how long it can take for Northern Ireland to get its act together about virtually everything and think that politics is not for them. Fortunately, that is not how this generation has responded. There are so many young people in this generation who, instead of stepping back from politics, have stepped up and stepped into politics. They have found campaigns on everything, from youth mental health to poverty. They organise in their communities and in their schools. They march, they protest and they mobilise for their own rights and for the rights of their peers. They care about the future and they care about each other. Those young people can work, pay tax, serve in our armed forces and get married. Those young people have a right to have a say in the future that we are trying to create for them. They have a right to help shape that future through voting. I cannot help but think that perhaps, if they were able to vote, our politics might take more notice of them and their needs. Perhaps we would have taken action on the climate crisis more quickly. Perhaps we would have legislated for abortion rights or marriage equality in the Chamber instead of leaving it to London. Perhaps we would show more urgency in tackling the housing crisis, including how it affects renters. For anyone who opposes this step, it is worth looking back at the debate when the age was lowered from 21 to 18. The same moral, illogical panic that comes from some very conservative quarters now came from the same quarters back then. No one would argue that the age should be raised or that the reduction should not have taken place. Some say that 16 is simply too young, but there is no one age, as the expert panel in Wales found, at which rights are totally conferred. Therefore, why not let those capable, talented, motivated young people vote? We need more of them to get involved, and we have no time to waste. In the interests of all those young people, today's motion should actually go further. It is all very well to ask the current Government to introduce legislation —.
Yes, certainly.
I totally agree with the Member. We need to get the job done, and we need to get it done closer to home. We need to join the other devolved nations — Scotland and Wales — that have lowered the voting age. The First Minister and deputy First Minister should seek the devolution of the required powers to introduce the legislation. Of course, we want this right for every young person in the UK, and I hope that the Prime Minister lives up to his commitment to introduce the right to vote for 16- and 17-year-olds. If he does, our MPs in Westminster will be first in line to vote for it, but we need to be able to make the decision here in our devolved Assembly for the young people here. Lowering the age from 18 to 16 is the next staging post on our journey to expand the electorate and ensure that everyone has a say in the decisions that affect their lives. Today, let us act in the interests of the 45,000 young people aged 16 and 17 in Northern Ireland by giving them the say that they deserve in their society and in democracy.
733 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.05 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.90 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.07 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:06 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.