RICHARD PREBBLE: A grumpy old man
I remember being 16 years old. Only my friend Jim Middleton, who went on to become the ABC’s chief political correspondent in Canberra, and I had any interest in politics.
At university among my fellow students, it was only the Vietnam War and the fear that we might be conscripted that generated interest in politics.
And me? I organised parliamentary campaigns before I was old enough to vote. At 18 I was responsible for a campaign budget large enough to buy a house. Mind you, houses were cheaper.
There was a campaign to reduce the voting age to 18. At the time, looking at my classmates, I was opposed.
Nothing I have seen then or since has changed my mind.
Through most of our history society thought 21 was the correct age.
When the voting age was 21 the state did not spend money trying to persuade electors to enrol. This year the taxpayer is spending $18.1 million on encouraging people to enrol. At the latest count 166,746 18- to 24-year-olds are yet to do so.
In contrast, 103.25% of the estimated eligible 70+ population is enrolled. (There are more of us than the Commission realised.)
Not only is Labour going to let 16-year-olds vote in local elections, but as a ratepayer I am going to lose my non-resident ratepayer vote.
The Supreme Court has ruled that not allowing 16-year-olds to vote is inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act’s prohibition on age discrimination. On that logic, why not give 14-year-olds the vote?
Not only do the advocates not remember being 16, it seems to me they cannot have had any 16-year-old children.
My father had the view that only those who were not dependent on the state should vote. He thought that when he received National Super, that should disqualify him.
He had the quaint idea that those on the paying list, not those on the getting list, should decide.
As, according to IRD research, just 10 per cent of income taxpayers pay more in tax than they receive in transfers, it would be a small electorate.
I hope most of us think stealing is immoral. How is it moral for a 16-year-old who has never paid rates to be able to vote that a ratepayer like me should pay more in rates? And Labour intends to strip me of my ratepayer vote.
Revolutions have been fought over taxation without representation.
Democracy is the tyranny of the majority. But a tyranny of 16-year-olds?
Richard Prebble is a former Minister and ACT Party leader who writes at I've Been Thinking
As I understand it, the human brain is not fully developed until age 25 or thereabouts.
If so, then I believe age 21 was correct for being able to vote.
I also believe, age 21 should also apply to military combat, vehicle ownership (although not driver's licences), being on licenced premises unsupervised by an adult and maybe even marriage.
(That should put a cat amongst the pigeons).
Dear Editor,
One of the things that troubles me about election campaigns is how little practical life experience may be required of those seeking positions carrying enormous responsibility.
Many years ago I read The Peter Principle, first published in 1969. Its central proposition was that, in a hierarchy, people tend to be progressively promoted until they eventually reach their level of incompetence.
There is an interesting problem when we apply this principle to politics.
In business, engineering, medicine or most other walks of life, advancement normally involves at least some progression through the ranks. You acquire experience, demonstrate competence, take on greater responsibility and, if you perform well, advance further. The Peter Principle tells us that this process can eventually…
In times of conflict we can conscript the youngsters aged 18 and over, so I am happy to let them vote - one day their lives might depend on it.
16 though? Nada.
I'd go much further.
At least 25 yrs of age.
Taxpayer within the private sector.
Property owner
IQ test
Public servants ineligible.
Yet more New Zealand insanity here. It's ridiculous that a 16 year-old should be given the right to vote. How mature is the mind at that age? How discerning, how capable of reasoned judgement? When so many of our so-called adults are ready to vote Green, what gives us confidence in 16 year-olds?