Reject Russell’s Brand

[dropcap]A[/dropcap]s the door is closed on 2014 and we prepare to return to normality after the delights of the festive season, all eyes turn to a fresh year – one of critical political significance. In May, over three million young people in Britain, including myself, will have the opportunity to vote for the first time. Our choices at the ballot box could potentially act as the deciding factor in the outcome of this general election.

And, as it stands, it looks like our generation is an open-minded and positive one. A recent Opinium/Observer poll, which surveyed the attitudes of first-time voters aged between 17 and 22, found that most of the participants were pro-Europe (67% would remain inside the EU), considered immigration a good thing for Britain (48%; 31% believed it was bad) and would keep the Human Rights Act in its current form (65%). The majority of us are also left-of-centre, with 41% intending to vote for Labour in May and 19% for the Greens.

At the same time however, it is extremely worrying that many young adults are increasingly disengaged with, and apathetic towards, our political system. At the last general election in 2010, 18 to 24 year olds were the least likely to vote of any other age group, and unfortunately this trend is expected to be replicated in May.

Yet not voting is both unwise and dangerous.

Firstly, there are countless reasons why making a choice at the ballot box is in our interests. It is the youth of today who are going to have to deal with the current crises which are building in health, housing and in the energy sector. Thus, it seems only logical to vote for the party we believe can best deal with these problems and lessen the burden we inherit.

Secondly, by not voting, politicians neglect the interests of younger people in favour of those who are more likely to secure them power. It is no coincidence that pensioners always win the luck of the draw when it comes to government policy. It is because they vote. Since the recession, the coalition has ring-fenced pensions (which, incidentally, account for over half of welfare spending) and universal benefits for the elderly, including the winter-fuel allowance and free bus passes. At the same time, payments for the young including the Education Maintenance Allowance have been cut, university tuition fees have been put up to £9,000 a year, and housing benefit for under-25s looks set to be abolished were the Conservatives to win the election in May.

Thirdly, as Polly Toynbee has so eloquently put it, “Those feeling alienated need to know that not voting is no protest: it’s a vote gifted to those you most detest”. This is why Russell Brand is not helping when he tells young people that there is no point in voting. As far as I can see, there is every point in voting.

Whilst it is very possible that Brand’s heart is in the right place, his wealth means that, ultimately, he would not have to deal with the consequences of a government that only serves the interests of a small minority.

Finally, Brand’s argument also falls flat with me when he contends that ‘all parties are the same’. This rhetoric is both untrue and serves only to deter the very people who have the most to lose by not voting. As far as I can see, there exists the biggest political gap between the two major parties since 1992, and arguably since 1987. Indeed, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies has stated that the difference in the parties’ tax and spending plans is “as significant as I can remember”.

All this considered, it seems not voting would be like shooting oneself in the foot. There is a real choice in May. Be sure to take it.
[divider]

Photo: Flickr/jessieesex