Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Did you like that? In considering Senator Siewert's highly-loaded question, I note for the chamber that the most significant and memorable postwar changes to the Australian electoral system were to reduce the voting age from 21 to 18, which our parliament legislated in 1973.

We weren't the first country to do this. After World War II this policy was one that was rapidly expanded, echoed and implemented across established democracies worldwide. Switzerland was the final major democracy to lower the voting age from 21 way back in 1991. The Turnbull coalition government strongly believes that a legal voting age of 18 remains the appropriate marker, as at this stage it is the age at which a person is considered an adult in Australia.

I have nevertheless heard the numerous arguments for adjusting the current voting age. Those have pulled in both directions, and there are those, such as Senator Hanson, who argue that a legal voting age of 21 should be reinstated—that young Australians, and I am going to quote Senator Hanson here, 'Don't have any idea, they've never had a job and they have no understanding of politics.' This attempt by Senator Hanson to tar all 18- to 21-year-olds with the same brush, in my view, ignores the contributions that many young adults have made to our nation's development and prosperity over many years.

A reversion of the voting age to 21 is nothing more than a form of social regression. Since as far as back as the Boer War, we have sent Australians under the age of 21 to fight for our country and indeed—as Senator Hinch mentioned—to die for our country. Hundreds of thousands of employed Australians are between the ages of 18 and 21. They pay taxes, and they employ others. Also, over 165,000 young Australians under the age of 21 undertake voluntary work in our community. These are people that deserve a say. Reinstating the voting age to 21 is contrary to parliamentary democracies worldwide and will only hurt Australia's young adults who have made an active choice to participate in our nation's future. They have earned that right through their vast contributions to our country. It would be absolutely ludicrous to take that right away. As far as Senator Hanson is concerned, I think we can look upon this as a cheap attempt to bar, potentially, what she may consider as an unfavourable slice of our population from electoral participation.

True autonomy for most Australians is gained at the age of 18. We can marry at 18. We can drink at 18. We can gamble at 18. We may participate in a contract at 18. We may also appear in an adult court. The line must, however, be drawn somewhere, and common sense alone tells us that the age of 18 is an appropriate point for that line. Society has long accepted this to be true. Yet common sense is only one side of the story.

Another often parroted argument by those who advocate a lower voting age is that by doing so we would encourage political participation among our younger citizens. If this were the case, if there were evidence of this claim, don't think that the Turnbull government would not be looking at it. The Turnbull government would weigh it up. It would consider its implications, and it would make a balanced decision that delivered the greatest overall benefit to our country. This approach is what our party stands for. But, unfortunately, evidence of this claim of potential increased participation does not exist. A previous ANU study looked into this very matter and found that allowing 16- to 17-year-olds the vote would not actually make young people more politically engaged or create a fairer democratic system. This result echoes the findings of a Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters which, in its inquiry into the conduct of the 2007 federal election, found that the voting age of 18 remains appropriate.

Improving the accessibility of our political system and encouraging young people to get involved with politics are an essential issue for the Turnbull government. This is reflected through more than 16 million people now being enrolled to vote. This is the largest electoral roll since Federation. It includes over 900,000 enrolment transactions just recently processed, between 8 August and 24 August alone.

I therefore advise Senator Hanson, the Australian Greens and Senator Dastyari to read somewhat deeper into the issue of the voting age before they utilise it as some sort of warped form of gerrymandering. The line must be drawn somewhere. If you take a reasoned and balanced view of the issue, one on which political pointscoring is not the primary focus, it is crystal clear that the current voting age is an appropriate and acceptable measure for our society.

Finally, I should inform the chamber that in preparation for my response to this matter of public importance I tasked a young man in my office, Mr Nick Henderson, to research a few of the statistics that I have mentioned today. Over the past few weeks, Mr Henderson has been working as a voluntary intern in my office and is today having his first experience of the strange life we lead in Canberra. Mr Henderson is an economics student at Monash University, where he was a recipient of the Sir John Monash scholarship for excellence and equity. He has also worked part time as a pizza chef, as a barista and in retail. He has volunteered at World Vision, and he has taught English in Cambodia. With a family member with autism, Mr Henderson has taken a personal interest in the rolling out of the NDIS and, in particular, in the certainty of its funding. While Mr Henderson has never been involved in student politics and is not a member of any political party, Mr Henderson is an astute and politically aware young man. Three years ago, Mr Henderson was not Mr Henderson; he was Master Henderson, a schoolboy, and he had done none of these things. He has done all of them since he left school. He's done all of them since he turned 18. Mr Henderson is now 20 years old.

Why would anyone want to deny a young man like Mr Henderson a chance to participate in the future of his country? Why, equally, would society bestow such a significant responsibility before Mr Henderson had the experience of any of the other responsibilities in life? This government will not be engaging with this debate, which is more about enhancing headlines than about enhancing democracy. It is more about better press than it is about better government. The Turnbull government is interested in making the lives of all Australians better, no matter what their age may be, by providing more opportunities, more jobs and a better future for all Australians.