argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Other
Sheryll Murray (Conservative, Centre-right): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I feel as though I have been accused of taking up a lot of time by speaking in the last debate. I made two short interventions, and I have been in the Chamber for a number of hours; the hon. Gentleman has not been. Do you think he should apologise?
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): No. I appreciate the point that the hon. Lady is making, but I have already dealt with the matter that the hon. Gentleman has raised. It is up to each Member of this House to judge when they speak, how they speak, the amount of passion they use and the length of time for which they speak, except when I tell them not to.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Other
James Spencer Cleverly (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. He mentions the members of the Oldham youth council in the Public Gallery and he mentions education. Does he not think that it would have been a better education if he had adopted the tone of the hon. Member for Croydon North (Mr Reed), who sought genuine cross-party agreement to achieve progress for his Bill, rather than spending the opening 10 minutes of his speech in the most egregious partisan tirade I have ever heard? Might he reflect on the lesson he is giving to the young people in the Public Gallery?
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Other
Wendy Morton (Conservative, Centre-right): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek some advice. I tried on a number of occasions to intervene on the hon. Member for Oldham West and Royton (Jim McMahon) and he turned me down—
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): Order. Whether an intervention is taken by the Member who has the Floor is entirely up to the Member who has the Floor, and is not a matter for the Chair. If the hon. Lady feels aggrieved, I can understand that, but it is not a matter for me.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Other
Eleanor Fulton Laing (Conservative, Centre-right): The production of explanatory notes is a fairly new procedure in the House. That might come as a surprise to Members who have not been here for long, but not so long ago we simply had to sit down and read Bills until we could understand them—a practice that I am used to. Whether to produce notes is a matter of choice for the promoter of the Bill, whether the Government, a private Member or anyone else. If the Member in charge of this Bill has decided not to produce such notes, it is entirely up to him. He might think that the Bill is fairly straightforward, but that is also not a matter for me.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I congratulate the hon. Member for Oldham West and Royton (Jim McMahon) on scoring in the ballot. In recent years the question of whether the voting age should be lowered to 16 has attracted a deal of interest and comment, including in inquiries by the Howarth working party on electoral procedures in 1999, the Electoral Commission in 2003, the Power commission in 2006, the Youth Citizenship Commission in 2009 and most recently the Commons Political and Constitutional Reform Committee in 2015, to name but a few. The latter Committee has now merged with the Public Administration Committee to become the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, which I chair, although I speak in this debate in a personal capacity The issues considered by those inquiries have been wide-ranging, and include comparisons of the voting age in other established democracies, the level of support for lowering the voting age among the electorate, the political maturity of 16 and 17-year-olds, turnout among younger voters, and the age at which people should become entitled to different rights and duties Any voting age is somewhat arbitrary. However, there are strong arguments in favour of retaining the status quo, and the arguments in favour of lowering the voting age are, at best, somewhat muddled and inconsistent. A line must be clearly drawn somewhere and the present age of 18 is widely accepted across society, and, indeed, across the vast majority of countries in the world; only a tiny fraction of countries have a lower voting age than the United Kingdom.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): Without wishing to introduce a partisan or discordant note, it is possible for another party to be consistently wrong for a very long period of time, and I believe that that is the case in the matter that the hon. Lady has raised The Electoral Commission’s consultation paper on the voting age in the UK was published in 2003, and it examined the voting age in other countries. At that time, all EU member states had a minimum voting age of 18 in national elections. The voting age has subsequently been lowered to 16 in Austria.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): This is a new concept of democracy that I have never previously considered, in which we do not count the number of people who vote in elections but instead count the number of political parties. I am afraid that that is not the way we decide issues in this country. We are elected by voters, not by political parties. It is interesting that the only country in the European Union to have lowered the voting age is Austria, which has just elected a rather unexpected head of state.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Other
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): What we must avoid getting drawn into—I apologise for this on my behalf as well—is choosing who should have the franchise on the basis of whether we like the way they vote—[Interruption.] That is not the basis on which we should choose who votes in general elections or in any other forum.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): We take our children out campaigning with us, but that is not an argument for giving them the vote. Indeed, it is arguable that if we take 16 and 17-year-olds out campaigning with us, we have a duty of care to them because they are not yet adults. I will come to that point in a moment.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Mixed Topics
Cheryl Elise Kendall Gillan (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and express my pleasure at the fact that he is at least putting an argument out there, which I think is essential. Does he agree that engaging young people in politics is extremely important and that the element of the Bill that is highly significant is the part that covers citizenship and constitutional education? Does he also agree, however, that lowering the voting age to 16 is not necessary in order to bring about what I and many others in this House see as the important engagement with young people about the business of politics?
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I wholly agree with my right hon. Friend, who is a colleague on my Committee. The Bill definitely conflates two issues, and I suspect that one is trying to be a carrier for the other The point is that the voting age is 18, and in some cases higher, in the vast majority of countries around the world, including the greatest democracies such as the USA and in countries similar to our own such as Canada. The UK’s voting age is therefore in line with the norm, and that does not suggest any need for change.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I am going to make some progress now, I am afraid. It is worth noting from many of the countries with a lower voting age, including Brazil, Cuba and North Korea, that the lower voting age does not guarantee a better democracy. Polling shows that this position is supported by the public, and I think that that is the really significant point. Polling carried out by YouGov in 2013 found that 60% of British adults were against reducing the voting age to 16. Only 20% supported the idea, while 16% neither supported nor opposed it and 4% did not know. That majority holds among young people, with 57% of 18 to 24-year-olds against reducing the voting age The findings of opinion polling conducted by ICM for the Electoral Commission’s review of the voting age back in 2003 were even starker, so it may be that opinion has shifted a bit. When asked to choose between a minimum legal age of 16 or 18, 78% said that the minimum voting age should remain at 18, while only 22% said that it should be lowered to 16. Of those who said that the voting age should remain at 18, 33% cite insufficient life experience as being the primary reason, and 30% cited immaturity. Now, those are of course only opinions.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I have a son who was interested in politics from about the age of six, but that did not entitle him to a vote. It is perfectly reasonable for 16 and 17-year-olds to be very interested in politics, but it would not necessarily be wise to give them the vote Evidence taken by the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee in the 2014-15 Parliament also reinforced the findings I mentioned earlier. The Committee reported that it received "extremely mixed responses to the idea of extending the franchise to 16 and 17 year olds, with somewhat more respondents opposing the change than supporting it… A strong theme in the comments from those opposed… was that people under the age of 18 lacked the knowledge, maturity and life experience necessary to participate at elections." The question of maturity was rightly regarded as a fundamental issue by the Electoral Commission when determining an appropriate minimum voting age. The lack of a single definition of maturity, its multifaceted nature, difficulties identifying indicators that are capable of measurement, and the variation in levels of maturity among young people mean that this is a challenging issue to grapple with. However, a paper by Tak Wing Chan of the University of Oxford and Matthew Clayton of the University of Warwick published in 2006 sought to address that point. Chan and Clayton found that survey data consistently shows that young people are less interested in politics than older individuals. Young people also know less about politics than older people and their views are less consistent. Interest in politics, level of knowledge about politics and consistency of views are all observed to increase with age.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I am not sure that it has, but it is for the hon. Lady to present the evidence that things have changed. Anecdotal evidence is not enough. The evidence we have clearly suggests that young people are less politically mature than older people. Therefore, the voting age should not be lowered to 16 An argument often put forward in favour of lowering the voting age is that it would increase levels of voter turnout and the participation of young people in politics. Indeed, concerns about declining participation rates in UK elections were a key reason why the Electoral Commission launched its review of the voting age in the first place. The commission also believed that young people’s disengagement with politics might be explained in part by their belief that politicians do not listen and engage with young people’s concerns.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I have given way to the hon. Lady once already Encouraging and supporting young people to engage with politics is clearly of great importance, and I do not for a second seek to undermine any concerns. However, lowering the voting age to 16 will not boost voter turnout, because young people have always turned out to vote in elections in lower levels than older people. Extending the franchise to 16-year-olds will therefore serve only to lower the overall level of voter turnout.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Peter James Bottomley (Conservative, Centre-right): I want to make two brief mathematical points to my hon. Friend. First, the turnout now for 16 and 17-year-olds is zero, but if they got the vote and their turnout was 60%, there would be an increase in turnout, not a reduction Secondly, we can be registered to vote at 18 and the average age of voting in a general election is 20, but if we could be registered to vote at 16, the average age of voting in a general election would be 18. Does he agree that that would be a sensible thing to do?
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Mixed Topics
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I am reminded of Disraeli’s dictum that there are statistics and statistics—I put it that way to avoid being unparliamentary. The point I am obviously making is that the overall turnout would be diluted by the lower turnout that would tend to be delivered by younger voters.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I am afraid that I disagree with the hon. Lady. This is a completely different argument. Members of my family, and of everybody’s family, were involved in pursuing the franchise for women, and we celebrate the fact that we have more women in Parliament today than ever before. She is having a go at possibly the one Conservative MP who thinks that we will have to take legislative action to get 50:50 equality of men and women in this House. I really believe that will happen one day, and I hope she also agrees that such action will be necessary.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Mixed Topics
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I will not be drawn on that point The National Citizen Service, established under the coalition Government, is a more recent initiative that aims to promote social cohesion, social mobility and social engagement by running a three to four-week experience for 15 to 17-year-olds.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): Not at the moment Another argument put forward in favour of lowering the voting age is that young people aged 16 to 17 can drive, join the armed forces or marry but cannot vote. Those facts are, at best, only half truths. For example, people can drive from 17, not 16. Although young people can join the armed forces and marry at 16, they can do so only with their parents’ consent, and in the armed forces they cannot be deployed to frontline combat. There are a great many other things that young people cannot do before 18. For example, they cannot buy alcohol or cigarettes. Are the other side arguing that they should be allowed to do so? Young people are also not treated as adults by the law, for they are dealt with by youth courts if they commit a crime, they are given different sentences from adults and they are sent to special secure centres for young people, rather than to adult prisons.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Alexander John Gervase Chalk (Conservative, Centre-right): Voting sits alongside another great civic duty, jury service, and yet young people I speak to overwhelmingly reject the notion of 16-year-olds sitting in judgment over close friends or family. Does my hon. Friend agree that lowering the voting age would create a bizarre and unconscionable discrepancy in that regard?
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): No, I am not giving way. They make it clear that society does not view 16-year-olds as full adults, and denying them the right to vote is therefore not some gross injustice akin to denying the rights of women to vote—such a suggestion is clearly absurd—but a consequence of their level of maturity and the role they play in society.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Robert Edward Jenrick (Conservative, Centre-right): The point my hon. Friend is making is that the point at which we reach maturity and come of age is a process. As a society, there are a range of things that we say people need to be 18 to do . Some of these things are quite trivial, such as watching an "18" movie at the cinema. Are we saying in this debate, "You should be able to choose your representative and the Government of the country, but you can’t go and watch ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ or ‘The Terminator’ down your local cinema"?
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Mixed Topics
James Roger Cartlidge (Conservative, Centre-right): My hon. Friend will correct me if I am wrong, but a far higher proportion pay national insurance. I agree with him that the taxation issue is the most important point, which I why I support it and why I was so frustrated that the hon. Member for Oldham West and Royton (Jim McMahon) was so unwilling to take an intervention from a Conservative Member. You are asking someone to support the welfare of the country at that point and take much wider responsibilities once they contribute to the national insurance system.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that point. I also point out that there is absolutely no reason why there should be a single age at which people become entitled to take up all their rights and duties, across the wide range of areas these cover. There is no inherent relationship between driving, voting and buying alcohol, and none are directly comparable. There is objectively no reason why someone should acquire the right to participate in all these different activities at the same age. Surely the important question is: what is the age at which people should acquire the right or duty concerned It would be a great mistake to lower the voting age to 16. Most 16 and 17-year-olds do not have the level of political knowledge or maturity required to vote.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Bernard Christison Jenkin (Conservative, Centre-right): Interestingly, when young people become older—when they become 18 to 24-year-olds or 25 to 35-year-olds—they tend to change their mind on the question of whether young people should be allowed to vote. Older voters are overwhelmingly against giving younger people the vote. I think that puts that matter to bed, and I repeat the point I made earlier: whatever the particular political agenda may be of 16 and 17-year-olds, that does not necessarily entitle them to the privilege of the vote What is more, lowering the voting age to 16 would put the UK out of line with the position in almost all other established democracies in the world, in addition to it not being supported by the public. [Interruption.] The Opposition seem rattled by that argument The arguments put forward in favour of lowering the voting age are weak and confused. Contrary to what some have argued, there is no inherent relationship between the various voting-age-related rights. Voting age is not the key factor in the fostering of young people’s interest and engagement in politics, and efforts should instead revolve around things such as how we can improve citizenship education and expand the Youth Parliament. The evidence shows that when the current generation of 16 and 17-year-olds become adults themselves, a majority of them will support keeping the voting age as it is.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
James Spencer Cleverly (Conservative, Centre-right): Does the hon. Lady not see the inherent contradiction in the Bill? Part 1 says that 16 and 17-year-olds are ready to vote, but part 2 implies that because they are in full-time education and need to be taught about citizenship and the constitution, they are not actually ready to vote.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Christopher Laurie Malthouse (Conservative, Centre-right): I think the hon. Gentleman knows that that is exactly what I am not saying; the main thrust of my concern is that the Bill kicks off an inevitable process that might expose 16 and 17-year-olds to harm. I cannot see how we can give someone the vote at 16 and then deny them all the other capabilities and abilities of adulthood.
Representation of the People (Young People’s Enfranchisement and Education) Bill — House of Commons, 2017-11-03
Topic: Civil Rights
Philip Andrew Davies (Conservative, Centre-right): Did my hon. Friend, like me, see the reported comments by the hon. Member for Oldham West and Royton (Jim McMahon)— he could have told us if they were not true, but he appears to have disappeared from his own debate—in trying to explain away the comments of his then hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Jared O'Mara)? He said that he was young and silly and too immature to know any better—when he was in his 20s. And this is the man who is now proposing a Bill to reduce the voting age to 16. Does my hon. Friend see some inconsistencies between those approaches?