Perennial local political warrior Kevin Loughrey has found himself unexpectedly thrust into the national spotlight in the debate over lowering the voting age to 16.
The retired Army lieutenant colonel from South Ballina, known for his colourful commentary and multiple tilts at political office, is calling for a dramatic rethink of voting rights in Australia.
The push to lower the voting age comes after UK Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the change would be implemented there in time for the next British general election. Such reform in Australia has long been supported by the Greens Party and more recently has gained traction with some Teal independents.
But Mr Loughrey is responding with a typical military-style counterstrike: open a new front and push the age up to 25 instead.
Loughrey says his view is based on both personal experience and medical science.
“The majority of psychologists and psychiatrists agree the human brain isn’t fully developed until 25 or even 30,” he said.
“That’s the point where critical thinking, reasoning and emotional maturity really kick in. Why are we handing out ballot papers before then?”
‘If You Haven’t Left Socialism by 50…’
While critics say if you’re old enough to work, pay tax or be conscripted, you’re old enough to vote, Loughrey flips that argument on its head.
“If you’re not mature enough to vote, don’t tax under-25s — and don’t send them to war unless they volunteer. We can’t have it both ways.”
He’s also not shy about his concern that younger voters are, in his view, heavily influenced by a school system he believes leans too far left.
“What we’re seeing is a generation raised in a collectivist mindset,” he said.
“They’re told to be ashamed of Australia’s history, living at home into their 20s, studying degrees in underwater macramé — and yet we expect them to decide who runs the country?”
He even quotes Winston Churchill to make his point.
“Churchill said it best: ‘If you’re not a socialist at 16, you have no heart. If you’re still a socialist at 50, you have no brain.’ It might sound harsh, but there’s a deeper truth there about emotional idealism versus practical experience.”
Despite having stood unsuccessfully for federal, state and local office, Loughrey says he’s seen enough at polling booths to form a view.
“Most of the young voters I’ve seen have no idea what they’re doing,” he said. “They’re there because someone told them they should vote — not because they understand what they’re voting for.”
A fledgling political reform group he’s co-founded, Australians for Better Government has already signed up over 100 members, and he’s recently completed a flurry of national media appearances sparking interest and debate on the voting age issue.
“It’s been overwhelming, honestly,” he said.
“People are listening. They may not all agree — but they’re nodding more than you’d expect.”
You can read more about Australians for Better Government at:
👉 https://www.australiansforbetter.com
If 16 year olds are required to vote, then you might as well require 12 year olds to vote, or 8 year olds. Or maybe even babes in arms should have a vote as well. Kevin Loughrey is onto something here. Why not limit voting to people with mature minds capable of being reasonably informed ? I’ve never met a 16 year old who had a clue about politics. And why should they have when they have electric bikes, mobile phones and the internet. Surely it’s better to leave voting up to their parents and let them enjoy their carefree teenage years in peace.
Before giving my opinion, the first thing I would be keen to hear about is what the logic is for lowering the age from 18 to 16? Once we have the basis for making the change I would then ask, who raised the notion of changing the voting age? Is it one political party? When considering changing the age to 16 from 18, we would need to understand what the possible positive outcomes might be, and how to implement a positive mind shift, if that was the case? Indeed, we need to be open to any negative outcomes, and possible risks before implementing such a measure which might be locked in for decades? First thing to check, are the current ages for other legal activities and privileges eg obtaining a driver’s license, either P or L, being engaged in employment and study, the use of alcohol, and the level of entertainment and social media, the internet are allowable. Once we bring these aspects together we could then review each criteria for age and consent etc… then look at how voting interacts. These are just some ideas. First and foremost, why the proposal to change the age, what would be the benefits, what are the rights and responsibilities for 16 year olds compared to 18 year olds, and how does this fit with politics and cultural expectations and values.