Lesson video

Hi, everybody, and welcome to another citizenship lesson.

My name is Miss Elmi, and I'll be your teacher for today.

Over the last few lessons we've been exploring the concept of democracy, and the focus for this lesson is to now look at how we can improve our democratic system.

How can we strengthen it and make it better? Now, before we get started in this lesson, I just want to make sure that you have everything you need in front of you.

You have a pen, a paper, and you're in a quiet space where you can focus and concentrate.

So if you have everything with you, let's get started.

Okay, so first I just want to do a quick recap about what we did last lesson and what we've been exploring over the last few lessons to help us put this lesson into a bit more of a context.

So last lesson, we looked at the role of media freedom.

And the main reason why we looked at the role of media freedom is we were doing a bit more of a deep dive as to what are the key features of our democracy and why some of those key features are important.

And one of those key features is the role of how freedom of expression is protected.

An important aspect of that is the role of media and ensuring media freedom.

So media freedom essentially meaning that there is freedom to express ideas, views, values in different mediums, such as through print, broadcast, or through new media in a way that is unrestricted.

And the purpose of the media, and this is something we explored last lesson, the purpose and the role of the media is essentially to hold those in power accountable.

So hold them responsible for their actions, to investigate and scrutinise the things that they do in order to inform the public.

But an important aspect of this in relation to it being a part of our democracy is really to look at the idea that although we have the rights and freedoms to express ourselves, and we have freedom of speech, those rights and freedoms also comes with some responsibility, okay? So there are no rights without responsibility.

And while some of the key responsibility is to ensure that there is honest information that's being put forward to the public to ensure the public are protected, and also to ensure that there is trust within our media institution.

And the way that responsibility is maintained is in how we control the media.

So last lesson we looked at those concepts, and if you do want to explore that a little bit more, feel free to go back a step and also review that lesson and then come back and continue with this one.

So just to put some context, we've now looked at democracy in terms of what it is, some of its key features, and now we're looking at how do we improve it.

But before we do that, I just want to do a quick recap identifying some of the key points that we've explored.

So firstly, what is democracy? And so in the first lesson we defined democracy, meaning it is a system of government in which power is given to citizens.

And essentially, it means rule by the people, where people have the power to decide who can represent their ideas and their views.

And in a healthy democracy, there are six core features that we looked at.

And those core features are free and fair elections, ensuring that there are multiple parties to pick, so more than one political party to choose in an election, it encourages active participation of citizens.

And that essentially means ensuring that the public are participating in the political system.

That there are protections in place that protect people's human rights, their freedom of speech and other rights that exist.

And also that there is a separation of powers.

And what do we mean by separation of powers? We're essentially referring to the governing institutions, such as the legislature, those that make the law.

The judiciary, those that determine whether or not the law has been broken.

And the executive, those that execute and apply the law.

And finally, one of the most fundamental features is the rule of law, understanding that no one is above the law.

So that is something that we explored over the last few weeks, but just to really contextualise this a little bit more, just to make you understand what the purpose of this is, is to really illustrate the idea that democracy does not stay the same, okay? Democracy evolves over time and it can be improved and it can be developed, meaning it can change over a period of time.

It doesn't stay still, it doesn't stay static.

So it's really important to note that whilst we do have all of these features and a strong democracy will have these features at varying degrees, how we strengthen our democracy depends on how much we can evolve and how we can develop as a society to improve it.

So improve our electoral systems to become more fair, improve the way people participate, and also improve how we can protect citizens' rights.

All of these forms are ways we can really evolve and build a more strong and more effective and healthy democracy in our society.

And that essentially is the focus of today's lesson, looking at one particular way of how we can develop our democracy to be stronger and be more inclusive.

And so just to kind of clarify and something that maybe you'd want to research yourself, there are three really ways that we can develop our democracy to make it a little bit stronger, to make it better.

We can look to improve representation.

And what do I mean by that? Well, currently,.

Excuse me.

Well, currently, we elect our representatives in the House of Commons, okay? So we elect members of parliament to represent us in one chamber of parliament, which is the House of Commons, but we also have some representatives in the House of Lords.

However, we do not elect those representatives.

Those individuals represent different sectors of the community.

So they represent industries and businesses and also different community members within our society.

They may have expert opinions and knowledge that they can provide when it comes to the lawmaking process that reflects that particular community or that particular industry.

But we don't necessarily elect them directly.

We do not choose who becomes a House of Lord member.

And so one way of improving our democracy is to actually give us that choice, give citizens, the public, that choice to choose in the same way we choose members of House of Commons, to also choose those that sit in the House of Lords, because both chambers are making decisions and drafting legislation that govern us, essentially.

So that is one way of improving democracy.

Another way of improving democracy is improving the number of people that participate.

So if you remember just a little slide ago, we looked at how we can improve and expand the number of active citizens, those that engage in the political process.

And there are many ways to do that.

One way is to lower the voting age, okay? So we expand the electorate, we extend the franchise.

These are words that can essentially just mean allowing more people to vote.

So lowering the voting age is one option.

Another option is making voting compulsory so that actually everybody has to vote, everybody has to express their will.

And so when everybody expresses that will, it enhances democracy because it ensures that their ideas and their views are being valued and represented.

And then the third and final way to really improve democracy is something that we looked at a few lessons ago, and that was our electoral system.

So we can reform our and improve our electoral system.

So we looked at how we decide who represents us in a few lessons ago, and we looked at first-past-the-post.

And some people argue that that particular system is not necessarily fair.

And remember, when we talk about having a strong and healthy democracy, there has to be free and fair elections.

And our voting system, how we decide who represents us, sometimes people feel can be unfair.

So a way to improve that system is to introduce a more proportional representational system whereby actually the votes that are cast is reflected in how the seats are awarded, okay? So those are just examples of how we can improve our democracy in different ways.

And for the purpose of this particular lesson, we're just going to focus on one aspect, and that aspect is in relation to participation, okay? And something that actually might be relevant to you.

And in that particular aspect, we're going to focus on the concept of lowering the voting age.

How far does lowering the voting age actually improve our democracy? Is it important to lower the voting age? If so, why? And if not, why not? So we're going to weigh up those arguments for and against, and we're going to see and discuss if and how lowering the voting age can improve our democracy.

Okay, so I just want you to now.

Let me just expand this.

I just want you to now have a look at this image.

And have a think about what you are looking at at the moment.

What is this image showing you? How might this link to today's lesson? And what can we learn from this image? So I want you to just to now pause this video and I want you to answer those three questions.

And once you've done that, come back to the video and we'll go through my thinking process as to what I see and what I think about when I see this image.

Okay, and welcome back.

Well done for having a go at that.

So what is this image showing? Well, as we can see, this image is essentially referring to the right to vote in the UK.

And it shows how the right to vote has been expanded over time.

So we can see in this image in the late 1700s, 3% of adult noblemen, those in high positions, those in prominent positions of wealth and owned property, were able to vote.

And by 1885, 56% of adult males were given the right to vote.

So we can see that there has been a reform.

There has been a change from the late 1700s to 1885.

And by 1918, the electorate, those that vote, was expanded.

The franchise, the right to vote was given to more individuals.

And in 1918, women over the age of 30 were also given the right to vote, as well as all men over the age of 21, okay? So before 1918, there was only a small group of people that were able to vote, in particular men and those who owned property and those that were noblemen.

And by 1918, the right to vote had been expanded.

And by 1928, universal suffrage for all adults over the age of 21 was achieved.

And by 1969, that voting age was lowered to 18.

Now, how might that link to today's lesson? Well, if you recall, at the beginning, we talked about this idea that democracy is not static.

That in order to ensure a healthy and strong democracy, it should adapt and change with society, it should evolve over time and it should aim to be more inclusive, meaning it should aim to include every member of society.

So as we can see from this image also, by 2014, this tradition of improving democracy continued.

This tradition of expanding our democracy, and expanding the right to vote continued.

And in 2014, for the first time in the UK, Scotland allowed 16 to 17-year-olds the right to vote in the Scottish independence referendum.

Now, that is a significant example.

Why? Because it is continuing essentially the tradition of expanding the right to vote in the UK and trying to be more inclusive and increase participation of those in society.

And as we know, active participation of citizens and having it be more inclusive is an important feature of our democracy and an important feature of a healthy democracy.

So what can we learn from this image? Well, one thing we can learn is that the right to vote, although hard won, has developed over time.

And those arguments to continue to develop and expand the franchise, expand that right to vote, still continues to this day.

And it continues in relation to 16 to 17-year-olds.

And that is the focus for this lesson, that's what we're going to be looking at.

And we're going to look at this idea of whether or not lowering the voting age should be the natural next step to improving our democracy and whether that is a good idea.

So to help us do this, I want us to just place it into context, okay? So the right to vote in the UK in particularly in the general election, is still 18.

And even though Scotland allowed 16 to 17-year-olds the right to vote in a independence referendum, they still cannot vote in Westminster elections.

So they still do not have the right to vote in the actual general election.

Another important feature and something to really note down, so feel free just to write this down if you can, is Wales followed that same pattern.

They also expanded the franchise.

They also allowed 16 to 17-year-olds to vote in the local parliamentary elections.

And so what we see here is now a pattern.

First it was Scotland, now it's Wales.

But England and Northern Ireland still have not lowered the voting age.

And in general elections, 16 to 17-year-olds still cannot vote.

And a good example as to in terms of how they participated, was shown in the Scottish independence referendum where 75% of 16 to 17-year-olds turned out to vote, which shows that there may be an appetite.

This shows that actually 16 to 17-year-olds do want to be part of the political system, do want to engage in politics in some way, shape or form.

So this is good evidence to note down.

So if you can just write down that particular evidence in your notepad, this might be helpful for when we look at some of the arguments later on.

Okay, so now that we placed it into context and we understand how democracy can evolve and how the right to vote in particularly in the UK has evolved, should 16 to 17-year-olds be allowed to vote? Should we lower the voting age? I'm going to show you a video now, looking at some of the different views, in particular, one particular view of young people.

What do young people think about lowering the voting age? And I want you to think about your own views.

How would you feel about potentially voting in the next general election if you were 16? As time passes, society changes and the law adapts.

So tell me why in 2017, 16 and 17-year-olds are by law able to pay income tax, national insurance, be a director of a company, even sleep with your own MP, but not vote for them.

Why are we able to feed into the country economically? So why isn't this possible politically? It feels like politicians only seem to care about the electorate.

So if we are not part of the electorate, how will we ever be valued, active citizens in UK? 150 Years ago, the radical motion that women should be allowed to vote was proposed to the Commons.

Quickly dismissed by a cough at the establishment, this was defeated 194 votes to 73.

The crusade for women's suffrage was long and enduring.

It took decades of campaigning, demonstrating and perseverance before the renowned representation of the People Act first granted the right to vote to a woman 99 years ago.

Members of Youth Parliament, last week, the second reading of the votes at 16 bill was cast aside in this very chamber and is extremely unlikely to be debated again as it is.

You might now be thinking, what's the point? Government clearly doesn't agree.

It's not going to happen, end of story.

But my friends, this is precisely what we must not fall into the trap of thinking like.

In Scotland, we are long-standing campaigners on this issue.

As the Scottish Youth Parliament has a firm belief that one of the best ways of getting involved in making decisions and having our voices heard is through the ballot box.

After all, we are the ones who have to live the majority of our lives with the repercussions of any votes and especially referendums. So it is only logical for us to be the ones deciding the world in which we want to live.

We should not be made to sit by and watch as our futures are dictated to us.

Today's decision-makers want us to become engaged and they want people to make well-informed decisions when they vote.

So we need to send them a message through our chosen campaign to tell them to let us engage and let us vote.

So we've just heard what the views were in favour of lowering the voting age, okay? And what I want you to do now is have a look at this particular task.

All I want you to do is essentially identify what those arguments in favour of lowering the voting age are, okay? So there are three arguments in favour of lowering the voting age, and there are three arguments against.

All I want you to do is just highlight the key arguments in favour of lowering the voting age, okay? Make a note of it and then come back to this video and we can explain each of those key areas.

Okay, and welcome back.

So should the voting age be lowered? So the three key arguments that you heard from the video alongside some of the key arguments that are presented in this worksheet, is essentially voting at 16 would be essential to matching some of the citizenship aspects are available at that age.

For example, 16 and 17-year-olds can get married, can join the armed forces, and can also consent to medical treatment.

These are key decisions that are made at that age, and therefore the ability to vote at that age should also be on honoured, okay? So if they can do all of these things, then why can't they also be allowed to exercise their civic duty, exercise their right to vote? Another key argument in favour of this question is that young people do have quite a bit of knowledge, more so than they did maybe in the past around political issues.

And much of this is because A, some of them might study citizenship, which helps to enhance that political literacy, and B, the rise of new media forms like social media has made them more susceptible to information, has made it much more easy to access information, in particular, political information.

And so young people may well be more knowledgeable than we would like to think.

And at the same time, another key argument around this idea of knowledge and having to be informed when you're voting, is that that same question of knowledge can be applied to anyone over the age of 18.

Doesn't necessarily mean anyone over the age of 18 knows more in regards to the politics and the political system.

They may even know less.

So this idea of knowledge, whilst important, it's not a reason not to give young people the right to vote.

Some others would also argue in favour of lowering the voting age because it's referenced in this idea of representation.

And remember, in a strong democracy, we should have strong representation.

And so, sometimes the needs and views of 16 to 17-year-olds might be marginalised, meaning it might be pushed aside or ignored.

In particular, on key issues like university fees, things that affect young people, free public transport.

These issues may be an important aspect to young people, but because they don't have that political power to exercise that will and saying what they want and what they value, sometimes politicians may choose to ignore or not place significance on those issues.

So those are kind of three arguments in favour of lowering the voting age.

What other kind of counter-arguments against lowering the voting age? What do people say in terms of not allowing young people to vote? So one key argument is that in terms of legality and when one becomes an adult, it's important to remember that the legal age to become an adult is 18.

And at 16, there are still restrictions.

Yes, you may be able to join the army, but you can't actually go to war.

You can't be in the frontline services.

And so it's only with the permission of your parents that in fact you can join the army.

So there are still restrictions in place for 16 to 17-year-olds that an adult might not have.

So by giving them that responsibility of voting without them fully taking part in society or being able to make decisions in society would be counterproductive.

Others also suggest that 16 is just generally too young.

They're still in full-time education.

They still live with parents and also they can still be easily influenced and it's not fair to influence them in that way.

For example, in schools or at home, they may be politically influenced to vote a certain way.

So it's important that actually they do wait till 18.

It's not that long.

They do wait till 18 so that actually they can make informed decision that isn't pressured or influenced by outside factors like their parents or school.

And the final counter-argument against lowering the voting age is in relation to turnout, okay? So one of the key points is that lowering the voting age will essentially increase participation.

And we could see that with Scotland, where 75% of young people turned out to vote, but that is not guaranteed that that will happen in a general election, nor is it guaranteed that will happen more in local elections and in a regular way.

So traditionally, the young voters, especially in general elections, 18 to 24-year-olds are very low, especially in more recent years.

And so there is a fear that by lowering the voting age, you're just going to kind of increase the low turnout, okay? So there'll be a decline in that turnout.

And in a strong and healthy democracy, what you want is to have a high turnout so that more people can express their political will and more people have that political power to influence how decisions are made.

So there is a fear by lowering the voting age, considering the fact that already there is a low turnout with young voters, that that will further be in decline.

Those are the arguments essentially for and against.

And what I now would like you to do is just pause this video and I want you to answer these two comprehension questions based on what you've just learned today, okay? In your opinion, should the voting age be lowered? What do you think? Which arguments do you tend to agree with more? And if you want to introduce a different argument, by all means feel free to do so.

And the final question that I want you to think about is, would lowering the voting age necessarily improve our democracy? Would it help enhance our democracy in any way? And I want you just to pause that video, try to answer this question and use the wording in the question at the start of your sentence.

Okay.

Okay, so question one: should the voting age be lowered? Now, you could have argued in favour, or you could argue against this particular statement, okay? So you can be for this or you could be against lowering the voting age.

So someone who would be in favour of lowering the voting age argues the following.

Some would argue that the voting age should be lowered to 16.

This is because voting at 16 would match other aspects of citizenship available at that age.

For example, 16-year-olds can marry, join the armed forces, and consent to medical treatment.

Therefore it makes sense also to allow them to take part in the democratic process.

Alternatively, you could have argued that actually that we should not lower the voting age.

And an answer that would be in disagreement would be: others may disagree and would argue the voting age should not be lowered mainly because many of the things that 16-year-olds can do are still restricted.

For example, they can join the armed forces, but not in the frontline services and even require the permission of their parents.

Therefore giving them a huge responsibility such as voting may be too much for them to handle.

So as you can see here, there are two different perspectives presented, but there is a clear explanation in terms of the position that this person has taken, an example to support that position and then a link back to that question.

Question number two, how might lowering the voting age improve democracy? Lowering the voting age can improve democracy because it could enhance engagement and political participation.

For example, in the Scottish independence referendum, in which 16 to 17-year-olds were entitled to vote, 75% had taken part.

Increasing the number of people participating is good for democracy as it ensures a large portion of the public's will is fully expressed.

Okay, now this is a very good answer because it not only outlines their position, it also explains why lowering the voting age can improve democracy.

And a good example is used to support that point.

Okay, so we have now essentially come to the end of that lesson.

I hope it was clear for you and that you enjoyed it, and that you've come to a decision as to whether you think the voting age should be be lowered and whether you think you in the next year or so should get the right to vote as they do in Scotland and Wales.

And so just to recap on the key points that we learnt in today's lesson, is essentially the following.

We learned about the different ways democracy can be improved.

And we talked about the idea that democracy is not static, but is ever-evolving, and there are ways to enhance democracy.

What you also learned in particular about lowering the voting age and how the voting age has been lowered in different parts of the UK and how it's been lowered for some elections.

And we also weighed up the arguments for and against lowering the voting age across the UK in a general election.

So those are the key things that we've learnt in today's lesson.

I hope you've enjoyed it.

I would say if there are any areas that you feel stuck in, please feel free to go back to the video and just recap on some of the key points that I've expressed.

And until next time, I hope I see you next time, and I hope you've enjoyed today's lesson.

Make sure you do the quiz at the end.

Take care.

Bye.