Franchise and Suffrage Flashcards
h
Suffrage franchise the ability or right to vote in public elections
Everyone over the age of 18 has the right to vote however they must be registered to do so also British and Irish citizens have reciprocal rights and can vote in each other’s countries Commonwealth citizens can vote so are UK national laws who have lived abroad for less than 15 years
This is known as universal suffrage and covers approximately 71.5% of the current UK population, Huge difference from around 200 years ago when only around 2.7% of the UK population had the a franchise —. The growth in the franchise reflects the changing nature of democracy in the UK
The extension of the franchise has made Britain a more representative democracy
h
You cannot vote if people are excluded from voting under the age of 18 EU citizens except Irish can only vote in local elections members of the House of Lords because they have a permanent voice as part of Parliament prisoners subject to challenge from the ECHR although the government has ignored this people detained in a psychiatric hospital people convicted of a corrupt or illegal electoral practice barred for five years
g
Problems with the voting in the 18th century before reform
From the late Middle Ages to the early 19th century there were no major reforms of the electoral system only around 400,000 people could vote women were excluded from voting although there are occasional instances of women who owned property you could vote plural voting allowed wealthy men with property in more than one constituency devote more than once could not vote if you did not have property very limited range of candidates all rich white male landowners pallets were not secret wealthy patrons of the nominated MPs are people are pressured to vote for them small boroughs had MPs while Emerging industrial towns were yet to acquire their own representation distribution of Parliamentary seats have not kept pace with economic growth and population movements
Two types of constituency counties and boroughs Which varied considerably in size in counties only there is owning freehold property worth at least 40 shillings could vote who could vote in borrowers depended on local rules and traditions e.g. in some or three men could vote but in others it depended on property ownership and some sort of tax
key milestones in widening the franchise
The great reform act 1832 the representation of the people act 1918 the representation of the people act 1928 the representation of the people act 1969
The franchise has been gradually extended in the UK since 1832 to include all adults over 18/16 in Scotland with a few exceptions such as prisoners currently serving a sentence
Attitudes to class gender and age have a valved the franchise has been extended previously excluded groups have been granted a more equal say in British politics and the way the country is run
The Great Reform Act (1832)
The great reform act 1832 was the first major change concerning suffrage and the franchise
Voting rights were extended to property owners like those who own factories and shops rather than just landowners in other words extending the franchise to the middle classes because they were growing in importance due to the industrial revolution — They had become a major economic force in the UK and contributed more to the economy than the land owning nobility
Created a standard qualification for the franchise all male household is living in property he paid a yearly rent of £10 or more were allowed to vote —. The value of property rather than land became the key factor for awarding the franchise
This doubled the amount of photos to around 650,000 5% of the adult population
Created seats for urban areas like Manchester and abolished seats in underpopulated boroughs
Showed that reform was possible and that groups could campaign for further change And persuade Parliament to make further changes
However still only around 5% of the whole population could vote
Created anger as MPs were trying to block democracy by rallying the property owners to keep the working class powerless
The Chartists
Demanded votes for all secret ballots regular parliaments etc
Were not taken seriously by Parliament
h
The vote was extended further in a series of stages because it became clear to the governing class is the gradual reform would not provoke violent revolution the gradual inclusion of more people into the franchise was the best way to ever such an upheaval
h
By 1900 many aspects of life for women in the UK were changing these included new jobs such as typists and telephone exchange workers teachers and nurses even doctors and architects which gave women from all backgrounds more opportunity to earn money and pay tax
Changes to marriage laws but that women could divorce their husbands for cruelty desertion or bigamy could keep that own property and leave the husbands i.e. they were free to live where they chose even if still married
Such changes had given women a greater sense of independence and personal responsibility but it was believed that they would need to be given the franchise in order to achieve full gender equality with men
Arguments in favour of giving women the vote in 1900s it would help to end all the inner qualities women have proven themselves politically capable it was happening elsewhere it was a fundamental right it would make Britain a true democracy
Arguments against giving women the vote in the 1900s men and women had separate roles women did not want to vote women’s focus should be on local national affairs it would undermine a system that worked women had not thought to defend their country women were represented by their husbands
By 1918 the issue of voting rights had to be considered because many men have lost the right to vote as a result of serving overseas during the First World War it was also felt that was meant for all classes at four in the wall should be rewarded this provided an opportunity to discuss with voting rights at the same time
Women had contributed to the war effort at home and in non-combat roles overseas proving they could take part in the defence of the country Women had provided valuable work during the war and should be rewarded with many Men away at war women have proved themselves responsible and capable of maintaining a safe country the suffragettes stops the violence and aided the war effort the government was worried that they might start up a violent campaign again now that the war was over David Lloyd George had become prime minister and was much more supportive of women’s rights to vote that the previous prime minister
The Representation of the People Act (1918)
All men over 21 and women over 30 could vote which meant that now 75% of the adult population could vote
Gave some degree of female in franchisement and full universal suffrage to adult men
There was pressure to give all men the vote especially after many how to risk their lives in the war yet could not have political say
Women were allowed to vote as they had contributed considerably to the war effort I put in themselves as responsible and capable so should be rewarded the government was also worried that the suffragettes would start up a violent campaign again now that the war had ended
However only women over 30 could vote had to be householders or wives of householders young and unmarried women could still not vote although this was the first piece of female suffrage but women were still not granted suffrage on the same basis as men
Throughout the Victorian period the test for admission to the franchise remained based on property it was not until 1918 that the vote was treated as a citizens right
The Representation of the People Act (1928)
Extend the franchise to all citizens over 21 regardless of gender achieved full adult suffrage equalise the franchise class gender and age were obstacles for voting for centuries but ethnicity was never specified as grounds for exclusion from the franchise
The Representation of the People Act (1969)
Voting age reduced to 18 universal suffrage no matter race gender or wealth reflect the changing attitudes in society about adulthood
The role and status of 18 to 20-year-olds have been changing — more 18-year-olds were gaining employment higher education and financial independence so it seemed appropriate to award them the vote
The Leyte committee set up in 1965 by Justice John Leyte suggested that the voting age should be lowered to 18 because 18-year-olds were more financially independent than in previous generations more physically developed increasingly mature better educated radio and television meant that young people are better informed
The later the committee suggestions on the passage of other legislation such as the marriage act 1949 which allowed the age at which a person could marry without parental consent to 18 the representation of the people act 1969 was introduced the past meeting anyone over the age of 18 could vote regardless of race gender or wealth
Scottish Elections (Reduction of Voting Age) Act 2016
In 2014 for the first time in UK history 16 and 17-year-olds were allowed to vote in the referendum on Scottish independence under the 2016 act this extended to all elections in Scotland but not a UK general elections or referendums
Suffragettes (pressure group)
WSPU Women’s social and political union formed in 1903 by Emmeline Pankhurst nicknamed the suffragettes and campaign for equal voting rights for women initially intended as an insult by the press
exclusion of women from the franchise was largely unchallenged until the late 1800s This changed with the NUWSS it is it was assumed that married women were represented through the husbands votes women were allowed to vote in local council elections but not general elections it was believed that only men should have a say in issues of national importance
Attracted both working and middle class support Female only membership — Through much of its support from working-class women though it started to recruit more middle and upper-class women when it moved to London in 1906
Clear and focused aims — Secure equal voting rights for women have a female only membership be a group of deeds and actions not words focus only on the issue of political equality and nothing else
Used more violent and militant tactics frustrated at the slow pace of the NUWSS the climate of opinion was changing but not quick enough — The Pankhurst’s have been frustrated by the slow pace of change of the NUWSS on founded the WSP you with a view to using violent and a legal process methods to draw attention to the cause and put pressure on the government
Wanted to attract publicity and put pressure on Parliament through violence and intimidation
h
Focused on actions not words often violent and a legal disrupting political meetings and other prominent male dominated public activities chaining themselves to railings outside Downing Street smashing windows burning and blowing up buildings firebombs deane to serious national security threat this alienate it potential supporters going to prison and on hunger strikes force fed showed the government to be unreasonably harsh gave the movement valuable publicity 1913 Emily Davison jumped in front of the Kings horse at the races Attacking or fighting police officers
These methods attracted hostility but also sympathy for their strength dedication and endurance
Showed moderation and flexibility when they suspended the campaign in 1914 for World War I
Suffragists
In 1866 the first petition to give women the right to vote was presented to Parliament but failed to extend the franchise to women and a variety of movements across the country created beginning with the Manchester Society for women’s suffrage
These various movements were eventually unified in 1897 by Millicent Fawcett under the NUWSS National union of women’s suffrage societies Nicknamed the suffragists founded in 1897 by Millicent Fawcett campaign other women’s issues to not just political voting rights
Mostly middle-class women members Who would usually campaign for other women’s rights issues such as marriage rights and employment rights Although membership is open to everyone And anyone can join the NUWSS and somebody join
Non-violent peaceful methods of protest and persuasion peaceful demonstrations marches and protests petitions lobbying MPs writing letters and pamphlets educational lectures Try to work with the government and persuade them rather than intimidate them national network of committees
Internally democratic members elected the president and Decisions being made through elected committees
The effectiveness of the two movements remains controversial
By 1914 the NUWSS had more than 100,000 members in 400 branches spread across the whole country
differences between the Suffragettes and Suffragists
Suffragists membership was open to all the organisation was internally democratic are used peaceful methods of protest they try to work with the government the organisation had a national network of committees
Suffragettes membership was open to women only the organisation is run by the Pankhurst’s with no involvement of the Members used violent and illegal methods of protest try to intimidate the government rather than working with the organisation was centred around London after 1906
did violence work for the suffragettes?
NO
The government could not be seen to be givimg into terrorists and these violent methods which prevented them from giving them the vote
Alienate it many potential supporters many preferred the non-violent peaceful methods of the NUWSS — The violence turned many moderate men and women away from the course membership of the WSP was decreasing by 1913 as people turned to the peaceful NUWSS
Arguably women’s work during the war gain the vote not the violence used by the suffragettes the willingness of women to serve in vital industries during the war persuaded the government of the fitness to vote however the vast majority of these women were young and I’m married so did not benefit from the 1918 legislation if the government wanted to reward women for their work this did not achieve that
the violence Seemed to prove women were not responsible enough to vote if they resorted to violence like this
The NUWSS became alarmed that the violent actions of the suffragettes were causing hostility from the government towards the course by 1914 public opinion was firmly against the WSP you and its cause making it easy for the government to ignore its demands
did violence work for the suffragettes?
YES
violence Led to brutal treatment by police which created sympathy for the suffragettes — In November 1910 known as Black Friday a WSP you protest resulted in a fight with the police that so many women assaulted both physically and sexually by the police
The government was fearful that women on hunger strike in prison might die and become a martyr to the cause of policies of force-feeding lead to criticism of the government and gained a lot of public sympathy for the cause
Regular violent actionsKept the public fearful and focused on the issue, Certainly raised the public profile of the cause of women’s voting rights And kept the issue in the public eye
Little to be lost by violence they were not being taken Seriously before then — People who already opposed to giving the vote for women were not going to be any more put off by the use of violence so there was little to be lost by its use
the violence was Sensational caused media to report on it and therefore raised valuable public awareness Of the issue of women’s suffrage
When the war broke out in 1914 the suffragettes promised to end violent methods for the duration of the war began to help the government organise women workers but the government was fearful that they begin their violent campaign after the war and so extended the franchise to prevent this
The suffragettes were the only group to achieve their aims using violence
Intimidated the government and forced them to listen some historians argue that the choir undramatic work of the suffragists went Whitely unnoticed and it was the suffragettes that led to the real change
Votes at 16 (current movement to extend the franchise)
16 and 17 year-olds are the most prominent group still excluded from the franchise
Votes at 16 coalition formed in 2003
Secure the study of the issue by the electoral commission although no change resulted
Still has a lot of support in the commons, Particularly from labour LibDem and SMP MPs e.g. Labour MP Julie Morgan sponsored a private members bill 2008 but this failed as it run out of Parliamentary time giving votes to 16 year olds is supported by over 300 MPs and over 200 Lords mostly labour
Important boost came and 16 and 17-year-olds were allowed to vote in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum a huge turnout in that age group 75% voted the Scottish parliament voted the following year to allow them to take part in elections
By the 2015 general election all major parties except the Conservatives were in favour
Also supported by the electoral reform Society British youth Council NUS etc
arguments FOR extending the vote to 16 year olds
Engages young people in society and the political system by encouraging them to get involved to have the say or opinion promotes participation encouraging young people to engage in politics at a young age will encourage them to become voters for life this will potentially solve the participation crisis
Should have a saying issues that will influence their lives such as tuition fees it’s on fair that they cannot vote on policies directly affecting them in the future
Already possess all the legal rights such as the right to leave school start work join the army have sex et cetera so why not the vote to however these rights often limited in practice due to children not being mature enough 16-year-olds need parental agreement to marry and very few are in full time employment
Knowledgeable and passionate about politics already for example there is a youth parliament and 75% voted in the Scottish referendum schools provide citizenship lessons so children know more about politics and can debate on matters however the Scottish referendum had unusually high participation in all age groups we cannot assume that this many people will vote in elections
Many countries such as Australia Brazil Ecuador et cetera already allow 16 and 17-year-olds to vote they can also vote in Slovenia if employed but most countries deny young people to vote at 16 UK is actually in the mainstream
arguments AGAINST extending the vote to 16 year olds
Too young lacked the necessary life experience and maturity to make an informed vote as well as being too heavily influenced by their parents views
Participation is lowest for 18 to 24-year-olds extending the franchise will only increase the slow turn out when people do not care enough about politics relatively few take part in the youth parliament or similar enterprises
Only temporarily denied the vote as they can vote when they’re 18 before that 18-year-olds share much of the same issues and concerns so can vote on behalf of them
ONS survey about votes at 16
ONS office for National statistics
Loring the voting age to 16 could change the winner and 88 seats for number 16 and 17-year-olds outnumber the majority that there is 88 MPs have this could cause the sea change if the youth were allowed to vote
Corbin is increasingly popular with young people which would perhaps motivate them to vote
Scotland referendum 16 and 17-year-olds voted at a high turnout at 75% shows that young people can be mobilised politically when given the chance if 1617-year-olds are allowed to vote in general elections this could increase turn out
points in favour of reducing the voting age to 16
Young people would become more encouraged and interested in getting involved in politics raises interest
Lack of political representation means young peoples interests are ignored and overlooked the average age for Representatives is over 50
Transition into adult heard is an ongoing process that could be enhanced by the chance to become politically engaged Earlier not giving the vote only encourages disconnection at a young age of 16-year-olds get the vote they’ll be more involved in society
The views of young people will be more focused on if they get the chance to vote as parties will have to appeal to them in order to secure votes and be elected into office — Increased electoral incentive to move to reduce the voting age would make politicians more receptive to the demands of young people and as a result young people would become far more politically engaged
Young people need to become more politically engaged because if they do not grow up immersed in democracy, voting will seem unimportant and alien to them this could in part explain the low turnout of 18 to 25-year-olds in the 2010 and 2015 general elections — Extending the franchise would have a positive impact on political participation and engagement as teenagers grow into adults who are used to being politically engaged and will carry on
points against reducing the voting age to 16
Most young people are still in full time education 16-year-olds are not adults yet lack of experience makes them unsuitable to vote
Young people show no interest in boating and are disengaged in politics Loring the vote would only mean more of the population not using their vote
They are only temporarily denied the vote 18-year-olds have the same concerns so there’s no need to lower the voting age, And before they reach 18 they already have a reasonable amount of political influence through their own political activities such as joining pressure groups or the youth parliament
