In today's newsletter: From students to renters to low-income families, entire communities are underrepresented at the ballot box, but who stands to gain at the next election?
Good morning. A 12-year-old today will be able to vote in the next general election, unless it's called early. When I first heard that, I laughed. No wonder there's so much focus on Labour's plan to lower the voting age to 16.
But it's another reform that could have a far greater impact on who votes - and who wins. The government has announced plans to introduce automatic voter registration, or AVR, where people are added to the electoral roll using existing government data, such as tax or passport records.
Right now, voters in the UK have to register themselves. It's a clunky and outdated system. One study recently highlighted the most difficult registration processes in any liberal democracy.
The result is that millions of people fall through the cracks. In 2023, about 8 million UK adults weren't correctly registered to vote, according to the Electoral Commission.
So what could AVR mean politically? How does it shift power in a significant way for parties both on the right and the left? I spoke to Luke Tryl, director of the nonprofit organisation More in Common, to find out.
The core case for automatic voter registration, beyond party politics, is simple: it expands the franchise. It ensures that as many eligible people as possible are actually able to vote.
Tryl pointed out that certain groups are much less likely to be registered, which in turn deepens existing inequalities. Those most likely to be missing are younger people, renters, lower-income families, settled migrants, students and people from minority ethnic backgrounds. The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) recently found a stark 19 percentage-point turnout gap between homeowners and renters. "Those groups end up having a disproportionately lower electoral voice because they're not registered, and that has a real impact on policy," he said.
It's not just about democratic engagement. Who is in the voter pool clearly influences what decisions get made and who is ultimately elected, Tryl explained.
He added that people in poorer communities often face a range of barriers, from time poverty and low awareness to disconnection from the political system and a lack of stable housing. Students, he said, may struggle with dual registration, while some migrants may not realise they're eligible to vote, or may not feel entitled to take part.
How will it shift power?
One of the biggest potential political impacts is on boundary changes. Registration rates vary between seats, Tryl said, so some MPs, especially in under-registered urban areas, are effectively representing far more people than others. And that's because constituency boundaries are based on the number of registered voters, not the number of eligible people. "The difference in some seats can be tens of thousands of people," he said.
So where does this under-registration happen? "It's mostly cities; places like Liverpool, Leeds, Bristol, London. MPs in these inner-city areas are representing larger populations, but that's not reflected in boundary calculations. If legislation goes through and we assume more eligible voters are registered, those people will finally be counted," he added.
Simply put, Tryl explained, this would mean more representation and more parliamentary seats in urban and student-heavy areas. But with the total number of seats in parliament fixed at 650, that shift would inevitably come at the expense of rural, more affluent constituencies.
"It's hard to argue against the principle of automatic registration," Tryl said, "but the boundary changes could make rural constituencies, some of which are already geographically large, even bigger."
Who is set to benefit?
The most obvious party set to benefit is Labour, which tends to perform better in urban and student-heavy areas. But Tryl tells me that others are also likely to gain from this change.
"The Greens tend to perform better in inner cities and student areas. Some of the inner-city areas that we're talking about are where the independents have done very well, in parts of Birmingham and potentially in parts of London," Tryl said. "The big losers are likely to be the Conservatives, who tend to represent more affluent, high-registration areas, and the Liberal Democrats, who've made gains in the so-called Blue walls - former Tory, leafy, affluent strongholds."
Last week, Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana formally launched a new political party, targeting the very inner-city seats likely to gain from automatic voter registration. Polling suggests the party could capture about 10% of the vote, potentially eating into Labour and Green support. Zack Polanski, who is running to be the next Green party leader, has already said he is open to working with any party willing to challenge Reform.
This emerging "Green-left" alliance could be pivotal in shaping the electoral map. On Friday, the group We Deserve Better, backed by the Guardian columnist Owen Jones, launched a campaign calling for a formal electoral pact between Corbyn and Sultana's party and the Greens.
As for Reform UK, it's difficult to draw firm conclusions for now, Tryl said. But previous research suggests the party's base is made up largely of older, non‑graduate, culturally conservative voters, many disillusioned with the Conservatives or drawn from the Brexit camp.
Will this increase voter turnout?
While this reform could have a far bigger effect on the electorate than extending the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds - there are about 1.5 million of them in the UK compared with an estimated eight million eligible voters who aren't registered - it is unlikely to lead to a dramatic surge in turnout, Tryl said.
Voter turnout in UK general elections used to be consistently high, staying above 70% from 1945 right up until 1997, and even topping 80% in 1950 and 1951. But it had plunged to just 59.4% by the time Tony Blair secured his second term in 2001. Turnout did climb again between 2010 and 2019; yet it has never returned to 70%. In the most recent election in 2024, it slipped again, landing at 59.7%.
"I think that represents a wider democratic disillusionment and disengagement," Tryl said, "but added that there was public support for AVR. 'Forty-five per cent said they supported it; just 21% opposed. So it is more popular than allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to vote. But clearly that needs to go and sit alongside wider democratic engagement in a nonpartisan way.'"
People need to feel that voting matters. And, Tryl added: "The fundamental challenge is too many people do not think that government is either willing because they think politicians are only in it for themselves and the system is rigged or capable ... to take on Britain's big challenges to bring about the change the country needs. When seven in ten people say the country is getting worse and the top word used to describe Britain is 'broken,' you've got overlapping crises: of trust; of exhaustion; of people feeling like they've lost control and agency. That is driving disengagement far more than the specifics of the democratic system."
The task for every party across the political spectrum in the coming years, Tryl said, is to prove that "government can work and that it can be a force for good".