Debate | The Voting Age Should Be Lowered to 16 in New Zealand

We’re proud to launch the PPC Debate Series 2025 as part of Politics Week. Across three debates, our writers explore opposing sides of timely prompts, replying to one another in short essays designed to challenge assumptions and open up dialogue. These pieces are the result of collaboration over the semester, and we’re excited to share them with you. 

Meet the Writers

Tia Deb is a second-year student in Global Studies and Communication, majoring in Global Politics, Human Rights, and Communication for Social Change. Her interests include youth voice, education, equity, and justice. Check out her PPC article “Why New Zealand’s Abortion Laws Are Not Guaranteed”.

Alan Wu is a fourth-year student pursuing a Bachelor of Law/Bachelor of Arts conjoint. Alan is a new writer for the PPC writing team in Semester 2, and his policy interests span economics, social policy, geopolitics, and generative AI.

With that, let's jump in!

Tia:

There is no real basis for why age 18 is when you suddenly become mature or reasonable enough to vote. Being a legal adult does not automatically make you more competent to vote than a 16 or 17-year-old, and several countries around the world have recognised and addressed this discrepancy (Child Rights International Network, n.d.). It is time New Zealand does the same to pave the way for a new, more engaged voter base.

Firstly, 16 and 17-year-olds are deemed competent enough to drive, drop out of school, start university, work a job, and have medical autonomy (Watters, 2020). However, they are legally restricted from making change where it matters – the voting booth. They are directly affected by government decisions – from road charges (Dirga, 2025) to transport fees (Auckland Transport, 2024) to the education system (1News, 2025). How is it fair that kids can be drivers, workers, or renters, yet are never given the chance to vote on these matters?

Secondly, the mental differences between a 16 and 18-year-old is not enough to justify allowing one to vote but not the other (Hart & Atkins, 2010). Additionally, the voting age has shifted from 21 to 20 to 18 (New Zealand Parliament, 2014), so it is evident that we should also adapt with the times.

Most important to note is that Aotearoa already has a low voter turnout among 18-24-year-olds (Macdonald, 2023). This issue is likely due to many factors, such as a lack of interest, education, or even practice. Evidence shows that the younger individuals are involved in voting, the more likely they are to continue to vote in the future (Denny & Doyle, 2009). Ideally, lowering the voting age to 16 would also be accompanied by rigorous civics education, but even without it, it is an important step in the right direction.

Young people are smarter than adults give them credit for, and by lowering the voting age, we would give them agency, ability, and a platform to make real change for the issues that affect them.

Alan:

The voting age should not be lowered. Discussions for lowering the voting are largely centred on strengthening democracy and community participation. If the priority is improving New Zealand’s political health, there are better means of accomplishing this. 

Representing our population is important and age certainly does not determine an individual’s political maturity. The reason we advocate to lower the voting age is to improve the health of our democracy; we should not then neglect the quality of political participation. For adolescent children, family is “one of the stronger predictors of future political attitudes” (Okolikj & Hooghe, 2023, pp. 101, 114). A brightline test like voting age may be arbitrary, but it does serve to allow Kiwis to have time to develop, reason and engage with the world before they participate in national politics. 

Improving democracy won’t simply occur from lowering the voting age. Our ultimate goal is to raise Kiwis to be global citizens, who participate in all aspects of their community, not just every election cycle. New Zealand once sat with a selection of states who restricted voting to the age of 21, which included nations like Singapore. Singapore’s lowest voter turnout this year, at 92.47% (Strait Times, 2025) is dramatically higher than New Zealand’s 77.51% (Electoral Commission, 2023).

At a glance, reducing the voting age will not necessarily improve political engagement, rather, we should focus our attention somewhere else. Improving opportunities for young people to familiarise and participate in our political system, especially its grassroots, should be New Zealand’s priority. If our desire is to improve the health of our democracy there are other, more convincing means to achieve that. 

Tia:

Lowering the voting age to 16 will increase the quality and quantity of voting. There are no real drawbacks to young people’s involvement in national and local elections, and it will ultimately only benefit our democracy.

Firstly, regardless of how young people vote, getting involved in the electoral process will set this up as a habit for life (Plutzer, 2002). Additionally, while it may be true that young people vote similarly to their parents, so do 18-year-olds, yet their vote is not questioned. This reasoning undermines young people’s abilities to make choices for themselves. Moreover, the Scottish Independence Referendum found that only half had the same voting intention as their parents (Langman, 2014), which shows that children can think independently.

If we are concerned about political congruency – or the ability to make a politically sound decision – then we should focus on educating our young people to form their own political opinions. Alternatively, evidence from Austria shows that 16-year-olds’ quality of voting is not lower than that of other age brackets (Wagner et al., 2012) and that lowering the voting age will likely create higher turnout rates in the future (Zeglovits & Aichholzer, 2014). While voting age may be arbitrary, there is clear evidence for lowering it.

Next, encouraging global citizenship will only be possible by facilitating young voters’ involvement in politics rather than educating older voters, who are generally slower to learn. Additionally, New Zealand’s comparably lower voter turnout to Singapore is due to their mandatory voting laws (Singapore Legal Advice, 2023), not necessarily because their voting age is 21.

If improving opportunities for young people to engage in the political system is our goal, then there is no better way to achieve this than lowering the voting age to 16. This is the outlet they are missing, as grassroots action already engages plenty of young people (Carnegie, 2022). What they are fighting for now is to get a say in the bigger, nation-wide decisions.

Alan:

A lower voting age has some benefit, but it is not the most effective at improving civic engagement. Our existing institutions do not support, nor incentivise, young people’s participation in politics. Retaining the voting at age 18 on the grounds of competence is difficult to sustain, and increasing academic evidence shows this (Breen, 2023, pp. 308-309). However, there is insufficient evidence to show that lowering it is the ideal manner to  address the press problems facing civic engagement (Youth Citizenship Commission, 2010).

There is cross-party agreement on improving engagement opportunities, and is clearly apparent in the diversity of perspectives in New Zealand’s political youth (Bunquin et al., 2025). If we desire tangible and substantial wins, we should attack this issue at the institutional level, with administrative reform. For example, voting pre-registration laws are arguably more effective at increasing participation (Holbein & Hillygus, 2016; Grumbach & Hill, 2022). Additionally, it may even be worth entertaining the idea of compulsory voting alongside countries like Australia and Singapore (Singh, 2024).

Improving democratic participation is not about increasing the voting population, but instilling the responsibility to contribute to one’s communities. We are lacking a curriculum that builds  young people up for these responsibilities. This is something New Zealand needs to prioritise first, before any other civic reform, as its lack thereof is clearly being felt in countries like the USA (Litvinov, 2017). Closer to home, Australian legal discussions have echoed this, with concerns of insufficient civic and media literacy for young people (Nojoumian, 2023).

Young people do not have the necessary support to thrive in our current legal and sociopolitical framework. How would a 16-year-old encounter and navigate the responsibility of jury duty? (Ministry of Justice, n.d.) Should 16-year-olds have such a responsibility? The short answer is: not yet. Before lowering the voting age, there must exist the necessary infrastructure that enables and invests in equipping youth for the world around them for genuine, long-term democratic participation. Enfranchising young voters alone without support may at its worst, be “downright harmful” and further political indifference (Chowdhury, 2025).

Tia:

Achieving a more engaged voter base starts with the new generation. Both sides agree that the voting capacity of 16 and 18-year-olds is the same and that current systems do not support young voters in this process. However, if civic engagement is our goal, we need to give young people real agency by allowing them to vote, with or without formal civics education.

Alternative suggestions such as lowering pre-enrolment age and mandatory voting are interesting angles but ultimately fall short of meaningful civic engagement. Earlier pre-enrolment may marginally increase voter turnout (Beadle et al., 2022), but does nothing to enfranchise young people to get involved in politics or seek an interest in it. When 16-year-olds are given the agency and ability to vote, they are far more likely to care, actively participate, and educate themselves (Leininger et al., 2024). Additionally, while mandatory voting will certainly increase voter turnout across the board, it again misses the mark of supporting young voters and has been shown to reduce the quality of voting (Rohde, 2024).

While civics education is undoubtedly beneficial, this should not be the requirement for giving 16-year-olds the vote. This mentality assumes they are not educated enough to do so, yet current 18-year-olds also never received formal civics education and are deemed competent enough. However, since there is a proposed civics education from 2028 (Ensor, 2025), we should be allowing this cohort to vote, specifically because it would be “a gateway to improving education in schools” (Leask, 2023) and would actively support the new curriculum.

Finally, many 18-year-olds do not turn up to vote because they face barriers, such as being away at university, lacking transport, and managing shifts (Burgess, 2022). This is not to say they are not interested in politics, but our institutions do not capacitate them well enough (University of Otago, 2019). Lowering the voting age to 16 would mitigate these barriers and help young people navigate the voting world much earlier (Khera, 2025).

When our ultimate goal is increasing the quality of voting and engagement, our best solution is lowering the voting age. Young people will inherit our world, and there is no better time to get them involved in the politics that will shape their futures.

Alan:

There is plenty of common ground between the two positions on voting age. However, when it comes down to feasibility, we should be investing in the source that produces quality democratic deliberation, not a symptom of its success. 

Introducing more young people to vote does not solve the issues that currently breed political indifference (Wagner et al., 2012). Although popular opinion has expressed a lack of confidence in the competence of young people (Carter, 2018), academic evidence increasingly shows this assertion is unfounded (Sheerin, 2007). To change such monumental resistance to young people requires generational investment in young people and their place in our communities. A system lacking this simply entrenches the existing apathy of the non-voting population. We are not ready to enfranchise young people if we have not yet even tackled existing points of reform. For example, there are calls to adopt e-Voting to improve accessibility for young people (Whitfield, 2021) and the strengthening of “citizenship education” within our high schools. (Finlayson, 2024)

If we want to repair our democracy and build a society stewarded by our next generation, we need to turn the tide, not simply address the symptoms. Voting, like other civic duties, are not rights, but responsibilities. Unfortunately, our current system is unfavourable to teaching young people the importance of these duties, forcing motivated individuals to seek non-traditional means to genuinely impact and involve themselves in politics (Sheerin, 2007, p. 117). We should not let the excitement of short-term measures distract us from the necessary, substantial improvements required by our democracy. The right to vote at age 16 is not necessarily a bad idea, but has its place in line behind other important reforms which would make way for it. 

References

Tia - Reply 1:

1News. (2025, August 3). Government proposes axing NCEA, introducing new qualifications. https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/08/04/government-proposes-axing-ncea-introducing-new-qualifications

Auckland Transport. (2024). Public transport fares are changing for under 25 year olds from Wednesday 01 May. https://at.govt.nz/about-us/news-events/media-centre/2024-media-releases/public-transport-fares-are-changing-for-under-25-year-olds-from-wednesday-01-may

Child Rights International Network. (n.d.). Countries where under 18s can vote. Archive.crin.org. https://archive.crin.org/sites/default/files/crin_voting_ages_compiled_0.pdf

Denny, K., & Doyle, O. (2009). Does voting history matter? Analysing persistence in turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 53(1), 17–35. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25193865?seq=1

Dirga, N. (2025, August 7). What we know so far about the new road user charges and the end of petrol tax. RNZ. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/569331/what-we-know-so-far-about-the-new-road-user-charges-and-the-end-of-petrol-tax

Hart, D., & Atkins, R. (2010). American sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds are ready to vote. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 633(1), 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716210382395

Macdonald, B. (2023, November 7). Young people vote the least. But that is changing. ReNews. https://www.renews.co.nz/young-people-vote-the-least-but-that-is-changing/

New Zealand Parliament. (2014). Voting age reduced to 18 years in 1974 - New Zealand Parliament. https://www.parliament.nz/en/document/00NZPHomeNews201408221

Watters, S. (2020). Should the voting age be lowered to 16? Nzhistory.govt.nz. https://nzhistory.govt.nz/te-akomanga/contexts-activities/should-voting-age-be-lowered-to-16

Alan - Reply 2:

Electoral Commission (n.d.) 2023 General Election Voter turnout statistics.  https://elections.nz/democracy-in-nz/historical-events/2023-general-election/voter-turnout-statistics/

Okolikj, M. & Hooghe, M. (2023). Political congruence between adolescents and their parents: evidence from a quasi‑experimental local elections in the city of Ghent (Belgium). Acta Politica 58, 101-117. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-022-00236-9

Yufeng, K. (2025, May 6) Voter turnout at GE2025 the lowest since 1968, at 92.47%. Strait Times.https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/politics/voter-turnout-at-ge2025-the-lowest-since-1968-at-92-47

Tia - Reply 3:

Carnegie, M. (2022, August 8). Gen Z: How young people are changing activism. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20220803-gen-z-how-young-people-are-changing-activism

Langman, E. (2014, March 4). Scottish independence: Research finds young voters “don’t copy parents.” BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26265299

Plutzer, E. (2002). Becoming a habitual voter: Inertia, resources, and growth in young adulthood. American Political Science Review, 96(01), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055402004227

Singapore Legal Advice. (2023). Is it compulsory to vote in the elections? SingaporeLegalAdvice.com. https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/is-it-compulsory-to-vote-in-the-elections/

Wagner, M., Johann, D., & Kritzinger, S. (2012). Voting at 16: Turnout and the quality of vote choice. Electoral Studies, 31(2), 372–383. National Library of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2012.01.007Zeglovits, E., & Aichholzer, J. (2014). Are people more inclined to vote at 16 than at 18? Evidence for the first-time voting boost among 16- to 25-year-olds in Austria. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 24(3), 351–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2013.872652

Alan - Reply 4:

Breen, C. (2023). The view from Aotearoa New Zealand: The electoral voting age and Bill of Rights inconsistency. Harvard Human Rights Journal, special issue on youth rights. https://journals.law.harvard.edu/hrj/wp-content/uploads/sites/83/2023/12/36HHRJ299-Breen.pdf

Bunquin, V., Bhardwaj, A., & Snelgrove-Douch, A. (2025) Baby Back Benchers: A Student Debate Round-Up. Craccum (7), 8-11. https://www.craccum.co.nz/baby-back-benches-a-student-debate-recap

Chowdhury, I. (2025, July 22). Lowering Australia’s voting age to 16 without fortifying civic foundations would be misguided. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jul/22/lowering-australias-voting-age-to-16-without-fortifying-civic-foundations-would-be-misguided

Litvinov, A. (2017, March 16). Forgotten purpose: Civics education in public schools. NEA Today. https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/forgotten-purpose-civics-education-public-schools

Ministry of Justice. (n.d.) Jury Service. https://www.justice.govt.nz/courts/jury-service/

Nojoumian, N. (2023). The case for lowering the voting age in Australia. UNSW Law Journal Student Series, (23-7). https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLawJlStuS/2023/7.html

Singh, S. P. (2024, February 20). Democracy Primer Series: Compulsory Voting. The University of Chicago Centre for Effective Government. https://effectivegov.uchicago.edu/primers/compulsory-voting

Youth Citizenship Commission. (2010). Lowering the voting age? YCC response to the consultation. London: YCC.

Tia - Reply 5:

Beadle, K., de Guzman, P., & Medina, A. (2022, March 17). The Impact of Voting Laws on Youth Turnout and Registration. https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/impact-voting-laws-youth-turnout-and-registration

Burgess, F. (2022, December 9). The youth aren’t politically disengaged, they’re electorally disenfranchised. Unlock Democracy. https://unlockdemocracy.org.uk/blog1/2022/11/9/the-youth-are-disenfranchised

Ensor, J. (2025, September 10). New secondary school subjects revealed, including civics education, journalism; artificial intelligence to be used. NZ Herald; The New Zealand Herald. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/new-secondary-school-subjects-revealed-including-civics-education-journalism-artificial-intelligence-to-be-used/EWABU7YK65D2DOAUNELOMJ6ZTA/

Khera, A. (2025, May 28). Lowering the voting age can instill civic responsibility in youth. https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/lowering-voting-age-can-instill-civic-responsibility-youth

Leask, J. (2023, June 11). Lowering voting age a “gateway” to improving education. RNZ. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/491755/lowering-voting-age-a-gateway-to-improving-education

Leininger, A., Schäfer, A., Faas, T., & Roßteutscher, S. (2024). Coming of voting age. Evidence from a natural experiment on the effects of electoral eligibility. Electoral Studies, 88, 102751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102751

Rohde, L. M. (2024). Can Compulsory Voting Reduce Information Acquisition? Games and Economic Behavior, 147, 305–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2024.08.005

University of Otago. (2019). Young people not catered for in current voting system. Otago.ac.nz. https://www.otago.ac.nz/news/newsroom/23-september-2019-young-people-not-catered-for-in-current-voting-system

Alan - Reply 6:

Finlayson, C. (2024, April 8) From the classroom to the public sector: The difference civics education can make. Hapai Public. https://hapaipublic.org.nz/Article?Action=View&Article_id=150472 Sheerin, C. A. (2007). Political Efficacy and Youth Non-Voting: A Qualitative Investigation into the Attitudes and Experiences of Young Voters and Non-Voters in New Zealand (Master’s thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand). https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/server/api/core/bitstreams/387cefd5-2449-4e09-8494-a8b12956b5e7/content

Wagner, M., Johann, D., & Kritzinger, S. (2012). Voting at 16: Turnout and the Quality of Vote Choice. Electoral Studies, 31(2), 372-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2012.01.007

Carter, C. (2018, March 3). Tauranga divided over Children’s Commissioner’s idea to lower voting age to 16. New Zealand Herald. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/tauranga-divided-over-childrens-commissioners-idea-to-lower-voting-age-to-16/HKMXSAJZI6UHYV5CMNZZFYPV2I/

Whitfield, K. (2021). Local government and youth voter turnout: Obstacles and solutions for Aotearoa New Zealand. University of Otago. https://www.otago.ac.nz/news/newsroom/evoting-could-increase-youth-voter-turnout-in-local-elections