ALLOWING 16-year-olds to vote in the referendum is nonsensical and sets "a dangerous precedent", MPs have been told.
In a statement at Westminster on the inter-governmental deal on the running of the poll, Conservative backbencher Anglo-Scots MP Sir Gerald Howarth said the age group were precluded by law from many activities – but would be allowed a say in one of the greatest constitutional issues of our time.
He said: "I do believe the proposal to extend the franchise to 16-year-olds, who cannot lawfully buy alcohol, they cannot drive a motor car or be called to fight on the frontline and are now being invited to decide one of the greatest constitutional issues of our time, is surely a nonsense and a dangerous nonsense in so far as it would create a dangerous precedent."
Scotland Office Minister David Mundell said the franchise for parliamentary and local government elections across the UK would still be determined by Westminster. He stressed the UK Government had no proposals to change the voting age nor was there a Commons majority to do so.
Mr Mundell urged his colleagues to take their arguments to Scotland so the SNP Government could be held to account in wanting to extend the franchise.
Labour's Jack Straw, the former Home Secretary, pointed out that when the Electoral Commission last considered whether 16 and 17-year-olds should vote, it found 78% of the British public, including Scots, were against such a change.
He said: "Whatever opinion this House and members of the public may take on the issue, why doesn't the minister acknowledge that the question of the franchise for referendums as well as elections is plainly by law a matter reserved to the UK Parliament and not to any devolved administration?"
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article