The next generation of voters are the youth of today, yet they are being ignored by politicians. Politics has become a foreign sport to young people, with rules they cannot understand and an aim they do not align with. Action must be taken to ensure that politics' relevance for adolescents does not become a thing of the past – and current politicians must be at the forefront of this movement.
Before we consider what can be done better, let us look at the political landscape from the point of view of the next generation (those aged 25 and under). Electoral data holds the key to this answer: if the youth feel engaged in politics, they will go out of their way to vote. Across the 2015, 2017 and 2019 general elections, turnout for ages 18-24 has been around 50%. If we hold this to be the case, then we can conclude that the next generation is not motivated. Given that voting is an essential means of political participation, this raises the question of why the youth are not voting, and by extension, why they appear to be indifferent to political activity.
There is a “hope deficit” in UK politics. Most news and events are now negatively framed, presenting things as more depressing with little or no effort to promote optimism. When searching for hope, politics does not provide a positive outlook. It is a dog-eat-dog landscape, with each man glued to his own agenda. This in itself is not an inviting prospect. On top of that, imagine being a teenager and hearing the government discuss topics that do not connect to your struggle. It is difficult to feel heard, and thus difficult to be moved to engage in the discourse. And it is exceedingly rare for the government to discuss matters that relate to your immediate problems. The next generation cannot engage in political activity if political activity is not aimed at them.
While this “hope deficit” may just be speculation, there are instances where we can see its effect on the next generation. Take Rishi Sunak’s plan to make A-level Maths compulsory. While some may be pleased by the government's concern with the education system, the youth do not see eye-to-eye with Mr Sunak. When a third of GCSE Maths students are predicted to fail the exam before even sitting it, it is unlikely that many would be willing to pursue it in higher education. While there are some benefits to studying maths beyond GCSE – after all, around 80% of our Year 12 cohort takes the subject – it does not seem that this policy will achieve its goals, not least due to the gaping hole in teacher staffing for maths and sciences in particular.
It is cruel, frankly, to tamper with the educational freedom of adolescents across the country. It is cruel to force them into a subject that many do not connect with. Here is a case of the government expressly disregarding the attitudes of the next generation, thus steering them to see politics as an enemy.
Similarly, there are instances where the government does nothing at all, and that only adds to the hope deficit. Mental health is an increasingly significant topic among the next generation, yet those in authority seem slow to take any direct action. Many pupils cannot access the support they need through schools due to underfunding, meaning that many will be turned away without any help. The notion of mental health is shunned for being too “woke", and so is any care for associated concerns such as climate change. But being “woke” is how young people elevate the status of topics that might otherwise go undiscussed. By dismissing and shutting down issues that the youth feel connected to, the government is adding a grim reality to the speculation of hope deficit.
If we distill this complex issue to focus on how to get the 18 to 24 demographic to vote, there are two main problems to solve. The first is young people's lack of engagement, the second is the red tape that de facto bars them from voting. The latter can be resolved through new initiatives to get more young people on the electoral roll, such as providing monetary incentives to schools that register students to vote. This gives young people the opportunity to vote without forcing it. However, the former may be a more long-term game. As previously discussed, the chasm between the next generation and political engagement is not going to be simple to fix. Fortunately, there are cases where young people have turned out to vote on issues they regard as important. Most notably, in the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum around 75% of 16–17 year olds turned out to vote. It is hard to deny the weight of this: young people will vote when they care enough to.
The next generation needs to be listened to. Greater consultancy of the Youth Parliament and an increase in their involvement would be a good starting point. After all, the Youth Parliament's aim is more satisfactory representation of young people's concerns. The youth need to feel that their problems can be addressed through utilising the potential for change that political activity holds. Giving them a platform to do so would be a step in the right direction. More education on the subject is needed in schools to make sure that pupils understand the power that politics wields.
We should also account for the new ways in which young people engage in politics – the use of social media is what comes to mind. Online petitions, sharing, reposting, liking, and so on have been ungenerously dubbed “slacktivism” and framed as a lazier method of political participation. Perhaps it is just a coincidence that this also happens to be what the next generation is more likely to participate in. Again, we see how the labelling of a certain activity affects its value, just like with the “woke” incident. Politicians need to be more open-minded and allow young people to participate in any way they choose to raise whatever issues they deem necessary.
Politicians should be more concerned about the hope deficit than the budget deficit. They must realise that they are pushing away the next generation. Most importantly, they must take action to work alongside young people and to help them help themselves. After all, it is we who stand to inherit their work.
Comments