Photo: flickr/ Daniel X. O'Neil

Like this article? Chip in to keep stories like these coming.

The decision by Justice David Stinson to not allow voter information cards in the next federal election shouldn’t be a surprise. Of course, it’s hard to believe that any law in a democratic country, let alone one called the Fair Elections Act, would intentionally raise voting barriers for at least 400,000 citizens who used voter information cards in the 2011 federal election.

This is especially true with voter information cards, which can help engage youth and students who had a 38.8 per cent voter turnout in 2011, of which 62 per cent used voter information cards.

But let’s not forget that the Fair Elections Act is only a drop in the bucket when it comes to the failings of current and past governments to engage Canadian youth in the decision-making process of this country.

Forty-five years ago marked the last significant attempt by government to improve the youth turnout in a Canadian election. It’s a sad reality that this had to happen under the guise of the youth-crazed beginnings of Trudeaumania, but when the Liberal Party managed to lower the voting age from 21 to 18, citizens responded.

During the 1974 and 1979 elections, youth had an estimated voter turnout around 80 per cent. Following this almost unbelievable level of engagement, voter turnout rates began a quick and disappointing fall to even greater depths of amazement.

Rising neoliberal sentiments in Canada contributed to a 20 per cent drop in youth turnout from 1984 to 2000. As academics such as Margaret Adsett have argued, the drop in turnout was caused by a shift away from idealistic social policies coupled with the loss of youths’ political and demographic weight.

However, as voter turnout on Election Day became sparse, essentially zero initiatives emerged to turn back the trend. In fact, the period is defined by an utter lack of effort to get youth reengaged in the political process.

Recently, there have been some halfhearted attempts to reengage students and Canadian youth.

In 2000, Ontario made it mandatory for all Grade 10 students to pass a class in civics. Evidence suggests that youth who have been taught on government or democracy are 14 per cent more likely to vote. But as the distinguished scholar Peter Russell among others have argued, these classes are riddled with inaccuracies and lack serious considerations for positively affecting young students.

British Columbia has also targeted young students through the preparation of two education kits to accompany Grades 5 and 11 civics classes. The province has also led the way with full online voter registration. This helped contribute to a 90 per cent registration rate among youth voters for the 2005 election but resulted in only a 35 per cent voter turnout.

Federally, the independent agency Elections Canada has attempted to make some strides for greater youth involvement. In 2003, it ensured voting stations on university and college campuses and has partnered with organizations to offer school-based programing. But as youth turnout has remained relatively stable since 2004, it’s hard to say how great an effect this has had on political participation.

Filling the space left by government has been non-governmental organizations. A notable example is the non-profit Council of Canadians and the “Get Out the Youth Vote” campaign; an initiative beginning with a national university tour aimed at inspiring and educating youth before the next federal election.

While efforts such as these have made some attempt at encouraging youth to cast their vote, ad hoc policies cannot challenge the firm cultural entrenchment of disinterest in traditional politics. Canadian youth need political leaders who are not only ready to speak to them but also on their behalf.

Parts of the Fair Elections Act are obviously wrong for Canada. But let’s not forget that this is only one more round in the child’s play of partisan posturing. Leaders need to consider that if political fears weigh on their consciences, perhaps concessions need to be made to policy and not the franchise.

Remember that the implications are beyond significant. Since 1970, each generation has participated less in the democratic process then the previous generation and if a person doesn’t become engaged when they are young, they are more likely not to vote later on in life.

If youth aren’t voting, they are without a voice and ultimately; they lose their democratic right to choose.

 

Minto is a student, currently completing a Master of Public Administration. Minto also holds a Master of Arts with a focus on twentieth century Canadian social and political history.

Photo: flickr/ Daniel X. O’Neil