Perspective with Ryan Bridge: Just because the Brits are lowering their voting age, it doesn't mean we will.

Just because the Brits are lowering their voting age, it doesn't mean we will.

Unless we end up with a Labour government.

I asked Erica Stanford and Carmel Sepuloni about Starmer's move in the UK this morning.

Erica was a hard no. Didn't like it.

Chris Trotter: The Numbers That Matter.

Did the independent electoral law review panel pause to wonder why New Zealand citizens become eligible to vote at 18? It’s a long and convoluted story, very little of which has much to do with cool, calm, considered cogitation. Like most of our constitutional milestones, the age of enfranchisement is the product of superstition, tradition, and political agitation. Rationality has only ever played a bit-part in this drama.

Garrick Tremain: More kids - more votes

 Here is Garrick Tremain's cartoon commentary on more babies and lowering the voting age! 

Barbara McKenzie: The Govt’s Backdoor Attempt to Lower the Voting Age

Changing the electoral act to allow 16 and 17-year-olds to vote is the policy of both the Labour and Green parties. They could follow the normal procedure for changes to electoral rights, with a referendum followed by a vote in parliament. The problem for the government parties is that there is widespread public opposition, so a referendum is unlikely to succeed and even if it did, a constitutional change requires 75% support in parliament – with National and Act in opposition it would never get through.

Instead, it appears that a more convoluted route to lowering the voting age is being followed through courts and legislation, which may enable the government to bypass both a referendum and the requirement of 75% support in parliament.