Young people might not have carried the news in this election but there is enough political feeling there to make the next generation of voters a vital constituency
One of the big concerns during this year’s general election has been about the next generation of voters. Were young people switched off from politics by the parliamentary expenses scandal and the disproportionate effect of the recession on youth employment? Did large numbers of potential new voters disqualify themselves from the electoral process by failing to register?
By the time you read this, we might have a clearer idea of whether the 2010 election was a missed opportunity in democracy or whether the TV debates and Cleggmania managed to kindle new life into British politics, especially for young people.
At the beginning of March, the Electoral Commission estimated that more than half of adults aged 17 to 24 were not registered to vote. That might not have been entirely due to disaffection over MPs’ claims for duck houses and the rest. Young people moving and failing to register at their new address made a significant contribution to the low numbers eligible to vote.
However, last month the commission reported considerable interest from young people in its own About My Vote website. It also said that about 14,000 registration forms were downloaded by Facebook users, who were likely to be at the younger end of the voter spectrum.
It’s still unclear whether this reflected a turnabout. In the run-up to the election, there were some vital areas that might have stirred young people into action – or left them politically cold if they felt they had no influence on the outcome.
University top-up fees has been one of the biggest issues for those newly eligible to vote. A review has been set up under Lord Browne to make recommendations to the government on the future of fees and financial support for students in England. It is set to report later this year.
With slightly more than 2 million UK-domiciled students in higher education, a number of them in marginal constituencies, it is perhaps surprising that neither Labour nor the Conservatives attempted to win them over.
Labour refused to make any commitment about fees in its manifesto, no doubt wary of the political bruising it received in the previous election over tuition payments for full-time undergraduates. Conservative leader David Cameron has said fees are here to stay, although his party’s manifesto was noncommittal. The Liberal Democrats said they would phase out ‘unfair university tuition fees’ over six years.
Not surprisingly, the LibDems have been growing in popularity among students. In an Opinionpanel survey, published by the National Union of Students on April 29, 50% of students likely to vote said they would vote for the LibDems – up from 26% at the start of the campaign.
The NUS wants to replace fees with a graduate tax, and is campaigning for MPs and parliamentary candidates to say: ‘I pledge to vote against any increase in fees in the next Parliament and to pressure the government to introduce a fairer alternative.’ More than 1,300 candidates from all political parties had signed up by last week.
The University and College Union proposes replacing tuition fees with a business education tax, raised through a hike in corporation tax.
The LibDem offer has had the edge in terms of vote-winning policies for young people elsewhere in post-16 education, including about two-thirds of a million 18 to 23-year-olds in further education. They promised up to 800,000 work placements, paying £55 a week for three months for participants, and an increase in the Adult Learning Grant for those aged 18–24. Labour offered skills accounts, an expansion of apprenticeships and 200,000 jobs or training places for young people.
Change was the mantra for the Tories. They proposed replacing Train to Gain with 200,000 ‘work pairings’, apprenticeships, college and training places a year; talked tough about reducing welfare dependency; and offered a work programme provided by the private and voluntary sectors on payment-by-results incentives.
The LibDems might have won the hearts of young people. But, in future elections, all the parties would be wise to tap in to the political influence of the younger generation, with the reward being a large number of new voters.
Stephen Court is senior research officer at the University and College Union
