When is an adult not an adult? It’s a question that the Labour party does not seem to be able to answer. Having struggled for years with the definition a woman, the party is now struggling to explain what constitutes a child. In their manifesto, the government committed to giving 16- and 17-year-olds the vote, arguing that it was necessary to ‘increase the engagement of young people in our vibrant democracy.’ In a press release last year they went further, arguing:
Young people… already contribute to society by working, paying taxes and serving in the military… This will bring UK-wide elections in line with Scotland and Wales and is a major step towards meeting a manifesto commitment, ushering in the biggest change to UK democracy in a generation.
Given that they are old enough to work, pay tax and serve, surely then, they should be allowed to buy alcohol? Apparently not, according to ministers – on the grounds that they, er, want to protect ‘children from harm.’ In response to a recent parliamentary question by Peter Bedford, the mastiff of Mid Leicestershire, Sarah Jones, the Home Office minister admitted that:
The government has no plans to lower the legal age for purchasing alcohol from 18 in England and Wales. This is consistent with the Licensing Act 2003 objective of protecting children from harm.
Yes, that’s right – turns out 16- and 17-year-olds are, in fact, children after all. Following Labour’s own logic then, they clearly want to give children the vote – despite the fact that Keir Starmer is determined to stop them buying non-alcoholic drinks. James Cleverly, the Tory housing spokesman, told Steerpike that:
It’s totally incoherent. Ministers should be honest with the public: do they want to give children the vote?
Don’t expect an answer on that one any time soon…
Comments