We are Yet to Diffuse the Democratic Demographic Time Bomb

The Hansard Society's recent ‘Audit of Political Engagement 6', shows that just 24% of people in the 18-24 age group say they are ‘certain to vote' at a general election compared to 57% of over-25s and 79% of over 75s, illustrating the massive gulf in political clout between the grey lobby and the young. And this is not because young people do not think voting matters - 83% think it is ‘essential' or ‘important' to vote in an election in order to be a good citizen - but it highlights a significant gap between intention and action.

Perhaps surprisingly, joining a political party and campaigning are more likely to be seen as important by the younger population than their elders. 45% of 18-24 year olds believe joining a political party is ‘important' in order to be a good citizen, compared to 34% of the public as a whole. However, just 1% of 18-24 year olds have actually paid a membership fee or made a donation to a party in the past three years - again underlining the problem of putting theory into practice.

The Audit's figures showing young people's propensity to vote dropped sharply in 2005 but then levelled off over the past three years. MORI estimate that only 37% of 18-24 year olds voted at the last general election and the findings by the Audit suggest that this could fall further at the next election. Research has shown that non-voting in the young can become a lifelong habit, leading Hazel Blears MP to warn of a ‘democratic demographic time bomb'. The Hansard Society works to prevent this and aims to increase young people's political knowledge and interest. The ‘Y Vote Mock Elections' project is a key part of this work, enabling schools to run mock elections so that pupils develop the skills and knowledge needed to become confident and informed voters. Pupils write manifestos, give speeches, cast their votes and publish results in a way similar to that of a real election.

Another alarming finding from the Audit is that young people's interest in politics appears to have dropped. 41% were ‘very' or ‘fairly' interested in politics in 2007 compared to 35% this year; the figure for over-25s being 54%. This is despite the fact that the last year saw its fair share of high political drama. The economic crisis - described as the worst since the 1930's - continues to grab headlines; we had the mayoral election campaign, which saw London's first Conservative mayor elected; not to mention ‘Obamamania', which saw a candidate inspire young Americans and others around the globe in a way not seen for generations.  We also have an increasingly unpopular incumbent UK government and for the first time in years a change of governing party seems likely in the relatively near future.

The Audit found that only 30% of 18-24 year olds had discussed politics or political news at all in the past two or three years. Yet with all the aforementioned events in the past year this is very hard to believe. What is more likely is that young people do not make the connection that much of what they discuss is political. The reliability of buses, payment of university fees, the age at which you can drink alcohol in a pub - all of these issues have a political dimension and all are issues that many young people are likely to have discussed in the past two or three years.

It has long been acknowledged that young people are generally more interested in politics than we credit them for, yet they dislike politicians and the traditional democratic system. They are interested in political issues, such as climate change and crime, but they don't see how this interest fits in with the UK's political institutions, something highlighted during a recent debate between young people and decision-makers on the Hansard Society's Heads Up forum:

"When I think of politics, I see a group of men debating about one thing or another, and after hours of endless droning, nothing is solved. However, I am sensible enough to recognise that it is more than that, but what exactly? ...I am keen on debating and campaigning, and finding ways to help combat issues in today's rickety world, but how is the question, as well as the fact that, what is it to do with politics?"

"After watching one session of PMQs a couple of weeks ago I actually felt quite embarrassed at the way Cameron and Brown had descended into scoring "points" off each other rather than focusing on the real issues ...Politicians should be setting an example to young people, not trading personal insults while avoiding actually answering questions."

Young people are far more willing to engage with single issue groups than with a political party. Despite their often low income, 24% have given to a charity or campaigning organisation in the past two or three years. The appeal of such groups is obvious, yet if young people's voices are to be truly heard we must convince them that political parties and voting also have an important role to play in our democratic system. We can wear all the badges we like, attend rallies and join numerous Facebook groups, but at the end of the day it is MPs - not single issue groups - that create our laws. It is Ministers who sign important multilateral agreements on terrorism, climate change and the economy. And it is the Prime Minister alone that has the power to take us to war.

The Audit found only 3% of 18-24 year olds had presented their views to a local councillor or MP in the last two or three years compared to 17% of the whole adult population. Young people have valid opinions and ideas on a vast range of issues and it is down to us as citizenship practitioners to inform them that voting and engaging with politicians is one of the best ways to bring about change. It is also their democratic right to lobby their MP and ask for their advice and help. MPs have a duty to represent all of their constituents - not just the ones that voted for them - and this includes those that are too young to vote. If we fail to emphasise this then young people's opinions will continue to be neglected, as will the issues that affect them.

Politicians also have a major role to play in this. All too often they fail to see young people as constituents with the same rights to representation as adults. They need to speak to young people in a language they understand to ensure that they are engaging them rather than turning them off the political process even more. They need to demonstrate that young people's participation in the political process is worthwhile and explain what the outcome has been. The online ‘Heads Up' forum is just one great way for those under 18 to discuss topical issues with politicians and other key stakeholders. At the end of each three week debate a report is submitted to relevant Government departments and committees so that young people can see that their voices have been heard and their contributions have been fed into the policy-making process.

If we take the Audit's figures at face value it is perhaps disheartening that the first generation of voters that were taught citizenship education do not seem to have developed any additional interest in politics as a result. But a further examination of issues surrounding youth participation reveals that the picture is more complex. Some commentators have blamed low turnout in the past two elections on the political context within which they occurred and argue that the results for the general elections in 2001 and 2005 were a foregone conclusion. This will not be the case for the next general election. All eyes will be on the 18-24 year old cohort to see whether they are inspired to turnout, as many did in 1997. If there is no renewed interest from young people when a sea change is again in the air, further questions about the future of our political system - and perhaps the efficacy of citizenship education - will be raised.

Adam Wilkinson
Citizenship Education Programme
Hansard Society