A 17 year old girl was getting rather angry indeed about how she was not only not allowed to vote in the EU referendum in Britain this year - which could seriously affect her future, depending on the outcome - but how nobody seemed to be talking about this scandalous exclusion of the young people from politics.
And... for a moment, I thought "Pfft. She clearly isn't looking hard enough. All us left wingers care!"
But...
Well, she's right.
Nobody is talking about it. No newspapers, left or right. Nobody at all.
At least, not now.
In November, 2015, the Guardian took a bit of a look at the idea of those aged 16 and 17 voting in the EU Referendum. Why did that do this? Because Parliament was doing this. In fact, the House of Commonds was voting on it, and - get this - they voted that 16-17 year olds would get the right to vote.
So... why hasn't it been done?
Why isn't it law?
Because of the House of Lords.
As far as I understand the situation, the idea of 16-17 year olds voting is currently being tossed between the Commons, who are now voting Aye, and the Lords, who appear to be voting Nay.
So yes. In fact, there are - or were - some people talking about it, but unfortunately for you, my dear, your dreams are now caught in the machine of bureaucracy, with nobody decent enough who has the power to save them, thanks to the unfortunately aristocratic style of government the House of Lords appears to subscribe to.
"YOUNG PEOPLE? WITH OPINIONS? NOOOOOO. NOT AT ALL."
Bastards.
In fact, the Guardian article (which I shall leave a link to in the post script) did mention that one of the peers - Lord Faulks, our Civil Justice Minister, of all things - argued that "... 16 year olds might be overwhelmed by the challenge of voting."
What? I'm sorry, what? This sounds like a man who simply cannot believe that those younger than him could dare to have opinions, much less want to voice them.
Now, don't worry, because a Liberal Democrat peer then verbally thrashed him.
"Can the noble peer tell us whether he has seen the film Suffragette? The argument he is just advancing was one of the reasons that was given for not giving women the vote until after the first world war and then not extending it beyond those under the age of 28. Those arguments were deployed by his contemporaries, as it were, of that period.” - Lord Tyler, the Liberal Democrat peer.
I was stunned when I read that, actually. I've never heard of the Lib Dems actually... well, doing anything. But this gentleman appears to have proven me - if only slightly - wrong.
Good on him. Really. It'd be nice to have a few more people in Parliament who actually said the right things at the right times.
Maybe then our Youth's votes wouldn't be in sodding Limbo.
Good evening.
~ Baxster Brand
PS: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/18/lords-back-eu-referendum-vote-for-16--and-17-year-olds
No comments:
Post a Comment