Copyright © Government of South Australia 2002
All legislation herein is reproduced by permission but does not purport to be the official or authorised version. It is subject to Copyright. The Copyright Act, 1968 (Cth) permits certain reproduction and publication of South Australian legislation. In particular s. 182A of the Act enables a complete copy to be made by or on behalf of a particular person. For the reproduction or publication beyond that permitted by the Act, permission should be sought in writing from the South Australian Attorney-General's Department. Requests in the first instance should be addressed to the Attorney-General.

ELECTORAL (VOTING AGE) AMENDMENT BILL

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Electoral Act 1985; and to make related amendments to the Juries Act 1927 and the Local Government (Elections) Act 1999. Read a first time.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This is the bill which would, if passed by the parliament, allow 16 and 17 year olds the option—I emphasise the option—of enrolling to vote in state elections and also in local government elections. The bill does not extend the change to the Juries Act—currently minors are not allowed to be empanelled—but it would allow those who wish to be to have a vote at state elections or in local council elections. If they chose to enrol they would have to vote but they would not be required to enrol.

People would ask the reasonable question: why would you want 16 and 17 year olds voting? I would ask the other question: why not? We live in a democracy and I believe there is a significant proportion of 16 and 17 year olds who do take an interest in matters affecting them in their local area, and the state, and who would like to have a say. Importantly, that age group at the moment has no political influence or power at all.

I was minister for youth affairs in the nineties and realistically there was a lot of consultation. I created the Youth Parliament here and also a lot of other youth initia­tives. People say that they listen to young people. It is great to listen to someone but you really listen to them when they have a vote. I would point out that the people who are currently 16 or 17 will be voting at the next state election, so, obviously, members would be advised to consider carefully their comments about the current 16 and 17 year olds, because they will be casting a vote possibly for those members at the next state election.

Teenagers are what I would describe currently as the lepers of our society, and I am amazed and horrified at some of the hostility expressed towards young people. I must say I have had only two negative responses. One person sent me an email saying I want to give the vote to young thugs, and I thought that was a pretty outrageous comment. Most young people are fantastic. Only less than about 6 per cent get into any serious trouble. Some members here would have 16 and 17 year olds in their family, and I wish them well.

Members also would know, from having had students undertake work experience, what wonderful young people we have in our state. We should not stereotype everyone on the basis that some are anti-social and break the law. Many people over the age of 18 cannot even fill out a ballot paper and are not knowledgeable at all about state or local council elections. So, one should not generalise about or stereotype young people on the basis that some young people may not be fully aware of all the political implications.

Under our current law (and this is an issue I have taken up with the Attorney, and he is well aware of it), we allow people with dementia to vote. My dear mother-in-law, who is 90 years of age, could have voted at the last state election; in fact, my wife could have voted on behalf of her mother (it would not be breaking the law) if she wanted to go down that path. In seats such as Unley or Norwood there are quite a few people in nursing homes who suffer from dementia (which is a terrible affliction) but, in reality, in some cases, their relatives vote on their behalf. Some people say that 16 or 17-year-olds will not know what they are voting about. Currently there are people voting under our system who do not know what they are voting about, and they cannot, because of a terrible affliction. We allow prisoners to vote—and I do not support the commonwealth's initiative to take away their voting rights. We allow murderers and rapists to vote, yet we say that 16 or 17-year-olds who have not broken the law should not be able to vote at all; that they should not have any say.

We focus on the young children—the cute and cuddlies—because they are very appealing. So, they receive playgrounds and other considerations, but teenagers are often left out of the equation. We have plenty of senior citizens' clubs (and we probably need more), but one does not see too many youth clubs around or many facilities or services specifically for young people. The catchcry, `Join the netball team or the football club', I think, is a pretty hollow response to that claim. I believe the major parties and the minor parties need to be mindful of this issue in the sense that, currently, to join the Labor Party one has to be the ripe old age of 14, and to join the Liberal Party and the Democrats one has to be 16. So, the Labor Party—

The Hon. G.M. Gunn: And to join the Independents?

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: The Independents, we take anyone! The Labor Party obviously is saying that, if someone is 14, they can make a contribution to the political process and, likewise, the Liberal Party is saying that 16 and 17-year-olds have something to offer. It would be very difficult for the major parties to say that 16 or 17-year-olds are not mature enough and do not know anything about politics when they have Young Labor, Young Liberal, Young Democrats and so on. I just point that out to them, because young people are very astute, and they are watching this issue very closely.

When I raised this issue through The Advertiser earlier this week, I received an incredible response from the media. It was interesting that the people who embraced it most strongly were the people of Perth. For some reason—I do not quite know why—in Adelaide, in particular, we seem to have developed an attitude that if anything is innovative or new we do not want to know about it. Yet this is the state—this is the parliament—that developed the secret ballot; the so-called Australian ballot. We gave women the right to stand for parliament before almost anywhere else in the world; I think we were first on that one. We were about third in allowing women to vote, and we gave Aboriginal men the right to vote back in, I think, 1860 but, sadly, it was taken off them in 1901 because the other states would not agree to continue it. So, we have pioneered innovation in terms of the franchise.

The arguments that people put up against 16 or 17-year-olds are exactly the same arguments that were advanced against women receiving the vote: they do not understand the world; they do not have any experience of the world; they are naive; they are not mature. I do not know quite what the term `mature' means. In the case of many people, I do not believe that, as they go through life, they necessarily gain greater wisdom—I am not sure that that is the same thing as maturi­ty, anyway. But the arguments are the same. The classic resistance argument is: not now; can't afford it; not ready; it costs a lot of money. Well, this will not cost much at all. It will cost very little, because the existing mechanisms are there.

I do not expect to hear people trotting out the argument: they are not ready; they do not understand; they are imma­ture. Those arguments belong where they should be kept: in the dustbin of history, because they were the arguments used against women, Aborigines and any other minority group. Teenagers, in effect, are a minority group in our community. In fact, as I said earlier, I find the hostility that extends to them rather disconcerting.

A shopping centre very close to my office played music to keep young people away, and it chose Frank Sinatra's Come Fly with Me (and if I ever hear that tune again, I think I will literally take off). The shopping centre was playing it loud and continuously to drive young people away. And look at the way in which people walk around teenagers. I am not sure why they are scared of them because, as I said, over 90 per cent of them do not do any harm to anyone. As I have often said, they are not just the future—which, unwittingly, is a put-down, because that is saying that the present is not important. If someone is 16 or 17, those years are just as important as if someone is 46, 56 or 96. We get only one go at life, and those years are just as important. Some people say, `They are the future; they can have a say in the future', and I say that they are the future but they are also the present. If we focus only on the future we devalue them and say, `You will not be important until the future.'

Let them have a say now and let them participate and contribute. I do not accept it when people say that they are not responsible. However, I think my measure would make them even more responsible than they already are, because they would have to take an interest. Some people say that if you give them the vote, you have to treat them like an adult in criminal matters. I do not have a problem with certain aspects of that, because I think that our current approach leaves a bit to be desired. I do not believe that a 17 year old who bashes up a little old lady is a child; I do not accept that at all. I am not averse to reform­ing the justice system as it applies to young people who are, say, 16 or 17 and who do bad things. I think there is a special case for those younger than that, but to say that someone who is 17 years and 11 months old does not know that they are damaging property or hurting someone, I think is nonsense. I think that we need to revisit that, and I think that the community would applaud it if we did. I would not call this measure radical: I would call it enlightened.

I think it is another way in which South Australia can show that it values the few young people that we actually have. We do not have many in South Australia, surprising as it may seem, if you listen to talkback radio. We are an ageing society. It would send a message that we value young people—those young people who pay tax, who at 17 can be in the military, who can consent to operations and who can drive a car. Yet, we say that they do not understand enough about how this place or their local council works in order to cast a meaningful vote. If that is not an insult, I do not know what is. If you can drive a car at 16, you can certainly understand enough about the voting system to cast a mean­ingful vote.

The Leader of the Opposition raised a point about the drinking age. I do not think that is relevant. Alcohol is a drug (or a compound) that affects behaviour; it is not in the same category as casting a vote and, therefore, it requires special consideration. In the United States, you are not allowed to drink in licensed premises until you are 21. The alcohol question is another issue which I will address some time down the track. We have a madness in our society where you are not supposed to drink one day but the next day you can drink yourself silly. We need to learn from the Italian community, who have a much more sensible approach to consumption of alcohol, where wine is seen as part of the meal, if you want to partake of it, and I am not saying you have to. But we have this silly idea that suddenly, when you turn 18, you can drink yourself blind when the day before you could not go to licensed premises because somehow that was evil or wicked. That is not a very rational approach. So, I do not think that the issue of alcohol consumption is relevant.

I implore everyone to look at this issue on its merits, to talk to young people to see what they think. Talk to them in your electorate and vote for the issue on its merits. Do not worry about what other people do or do not do in other states. In some countries, they cut people's hands off; we do not have to follow suit. Let us make a decision. Let us be enlightened. Let us value our young people and have confidence in the ability of those who want to participate to have a say in a council election or a state election in a responsible manner. I commend the bill to the house.

Mrs GERAGHTY secured the adjournment of the debate.