Last September, the veteran Labour MP Graham Stringer told The Mail on Sunday that 'we have to draw the line somewhere on the voting age, and I simply believe most youngsters at 16 are not mature enough to exercise that right'.
He added: 'I'm afraid that, were the Labour leader to put this forward, it would smack of party-political self-interest on the basis that young people are more likely to vote Labour or Liberal Democrat than Conservative.'
Now that Sir Keir Starmer has signalled quite clearly that he plans to bring in votes at 16 within a year of taking office (if he does), the existing electorate has a chance to judge the action before it is too late.
Now that Sir Keir Starmer has signalled quite clearly that he plans to bring in votes at 16 within a year of taking office (if he does), the existing electorate has a chance to judge the action before it is too late.
Labour beat the Conservatives by 43 percentage points among 18- to 24-year-olds at the last election
Citizens might be wise to be cautious. Britain as a whole has a startling age versus youth divide in its politics.
Last September, the National Centre for Social Research reported that 'age has become the biggest demographic divide in British politics, with younger people being more likely to vote Labour'.
Labour beat the Conservatives by 43 percentage points among 18- to 24-year-olds at the last election.
It is hard to imagine that Sir Keir would pursue this policy if young people were more Right-wing than the middle-aged or the old.
Supporters of the change like to say that under-18s must face many of the responsibilities of life, so they should be allowed a part in choosing the government.
But in fact the law, especially in England, still places many restrictions on them.
Existing rules say under-18s cannot drink alcohol in pubs, cannot be tattooed, cannot buy cigarettes and cannot serve on juries. Is there any pressure to remove these wise limits?
Although they may join up at 16, members of the Armed Forces cannot legally be deployed on the front line until they turn 18.
As for marriage, English law was recently changed, with support from all major parties, to raise the minimum age from 16 to 18 (this does not apply in Scotland or Northern Ireland).
This change was made to protect young people from being manipulated or exploited.
We know that Gordon Brown has already set out plans for a dramatic reform of Parliament itself
All these rules suggest a strong belief that 16 is too young to take some very major decisions. The case against votes at 16 is strong. The Starmer policy is both cynical and self-serving, and it is hard to claim that there is universal agreement that 16-year-olds are fully ready to take the major decisions involved in voting.
But there is a deeper question. How far is Sir Keir Starmer's Labour Party willing to change the rules and move the goalposts to stay in power? The Blair government showed that Labour have a huge appetite for major and lasting constitutional change, and we know that Gordon Brown has already set out plans for a dramatic reform of Parliament itself.
Some may imagine that they can give Labour a chance, and then easily remove them from office if (as is more than likely) they make the usual mess. It may not prove that easy in practice.
