When Scotland’s nationalist government dropped the voting age to 16 for this year’s referendum on independence, it was widely seen as banking on teenage radicalism to ensure a break with the UK.
If so, it may have miscalculated. Two opinion polls and Reuters interviews with 25 Scottish teenagers in 10 different locations suggest that the ruling Scottish National Party (SNP) cannot be sure of their support in the Sept. 18 referendum.
“Whilst I’m proud to be Scottish, I believe we’re financially and economically stronger in the larger union,” student Charlotte Smith, 16, told Reuters during a break from revision for summer exams.
“But I am pleased that the reduced age limit allows me to participate,” added Smith, from Dumfries in southwest Scotland, describing the vote as historic.
Few polls have asked the 16 and 17-year-olds how they plan to use their one-off chance to vote in the referendum on ending the 307-year-old union with the rest of Britain.
Overall, polls show Scots remain doubtful about separation, although the proportion of those supporting independence has increased over the past year. Many are still undecided.
In a survey of 1,000 young Scots in May last year, researchers from Edinburgh University found that 60 percent of the 14-to-17-year-olds opposed independence, with 21 percent in support.
A poll of 1,500 older students at Glasgow Caledonian University this year found 63 percent wanted to stay in the UK.
The voting age for UK elections is 18. Only a few countries allow 16-year-olds to vote.
Of 25 teenagers questioned by Reuters, 13 planned to vote “No” to independence, nine “Yes,” and the rest were undecided.
While these 25 interviews cannot give anything like a full picture of Scottish youth views, they do underline that neither side can take Scotland’s teenagers for granted.
“I’m unsure what would happen with a ‘Yes’ vote,” said Danny Hutcheson, 16, of Fraserburgh, Aberdeenshire, who plays the bagpipes in a local band.
He worries about the future currency of an independent Scotland, defense and the division of oil reserves, issues that would need to be negotiated with London between a “Yes” vote and the March 24, 2016, date set for Scottish independence.
Political scientist Mark Shephard of Strathclyde University, who has been conducting a social media project on Scottish independence, said this was a common concern among teenagers.
“The possibility of market uncertainty over what is going to happen just at the time students are contemplating the job market during a period of prolonged economic difficulties is influencing them,” he said.
Figures from the National Records of Scotland this month show teenagers keen to vote. More than 98,000 aged 16 or 17 are already registered for September — about 80 percent of that age group, making up about 3 percent of the 4 million voters.
“This level of interest clearly demonstrates that giving the vote to 16 and 17-year-olds is clearly the right thing to do,” SNP deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon said in a statement.
Sixteen-year-old Megan McKay backed the “Yes” campaign in a debate at her school in Banff, 275km north of Edinburgh, saying an independent Scotland could make better use of its oil wealth.
She was also attracted by promises to get rid of nuclear weapons and keep university education free — in England, tuition costs about ￡9,000 (US$15,000) a year.
Independence “will provide better opportunities for young people, including students,” McKay said in a break from surfing in the cold waters off the east coast of Scotland at Macduff in Aberdeenshire.
“Scotland ... will become a wealthier nation,” she predicted. “It’s also influenced me to get more involved in Scottish politics.”
Mairie McGillivray, 16, a student and Scottish country dancer from Islay in the Inner Hebrides, believes Scotland would be better off culturally if it left the UK and shares a widely held view that Britain’s voting system does not reflect Scottish views accurately.
“I believe that Scotland isn’t governed by democratic means due to our lack of representation in Westminster,” she said.
However, Hannah Campbell, also 16, fears an independent Scotland would lose its voice on the world stage and says the country stands to gain more from the EU if it stays in the UK. Her family runs a farm in Inverness-shire in the Highlands.
“I will vote ‘No,’ as I think that our country is fine the way it is and we don’t need such dramatic change,” she said on the farm where she had just helped her father deliver a calf.
The intentions of Scotland’s 16 and 17-year-olds have puzzled politicians since the British government dropped opposition to the one-off lowering of the voting age.
Some assumed they would be more impressionable and more easily persuaded to vote for independence than their elders.
Both unionists and secessionists agree a large number of undecided voters means a relatively small group could swing the referendum in a nation where SNP leader Alex Salmond scored a surprise landslide in 2011 Scottish parliamentary elections.
Salmond’s victory gave him the clout to insist on an independence vote that British Prime Minister David Cameron agreed to in 2012. Cameron opposes independence.
Social media is a battleground for youth votes.
The Yes Scotland campaign has notched up 40,700 Twitter followers and about 150,000 likes on Facebook, while the pro-union Better Together has 22,400 Twitter followers and 120,000 Facebook likes.
“You will have to look hard to find someone more patriotic than me and when it all came about a few years ago I was all for independence,” said Kieran Green, 16, a student and a keen soccer player from Edinburgh.
“But growing up and maturing has made me rethink. My heart says ‘Yes,’ but my head says ‘No,’” Green added.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS