Should 16-year-old Australians be given the vote?

That's the subject of a recent bill introduced to Federal Parliament by Western Australian Greens senator Jordon Steele-John.

Lowering the voting age to 16 would "show young people that we hear them, we care about their opinions and we are working for their future," the 23-year-old WA senator said.

But the bill, which has already stoked its share of controversy, goes one step further.

Sorry, this audio has expired Should the voting age be lowered to 16?

Not only does it push for the vote to be given to 16 and 17-year-olds, it seeks to extend franchise on a voluntary basis only.

Such a move, critics note, could water down Australia's system of compulsory voting — one of the great strengths of our democracy.

The good news, as research from overseas suggests, is that first-time voters who are 16- or 17-years-old tend to be more likely to enrol to vote and participate in elections than first-time voters between the ages of 18 and 20.

Findings like this are important because they show that not only is age important, but that youth isn't always or necessarily anathema to electoral participation.

Unlike those in the age bracket of 18 to 20, research confirms that the majority of 16- to 17-year-olds have yet to experience the common upheavals that come with finishing school, leaving home, finding employment and housing, and adapting to life as young adults.

Greens senator Jordon Steele-John's (R) bill pushes for the vote to be given to 16- and 17-year-olds. ( ABC News: Matthew Roberts, file photo )

Without these disruptions to life, younger teens can have more incentive and interest to vote.

They may also be supported by a network of family, teachers, and friends — both at home and at school — all of whom can help socialise them into the practice of voting at elections.

This is also where we might see the greatest benefit of introducing the vote on a non-compulsory basis.

Encouraging but not enforcing the vote may "serve as a grace period for young people, allowing them to familiarise themselves with our electoral process without fear of being penalised," Senator Steele-John said.

Brexit might have turned out differently

Now consider what can happen for first-time voters in their late teens and early 20s.

Many in this age bracket have left or are about to leave home.

They may be without a fixed address, ongoing employment, or longer-term considerations about money, marriage, and home ownership.

Some might even find themselves displaced from their family and social networks for the first time in their lives.

With little tying them down, the incentives and logistics of casting a ballot can be diminished.

For these reasons, voting can easily become a second or even third order concern.

There's perhaps no better illustration of such an argument than what occurred recently in the UK, during the 2014 Scottish referendum and the 2016 Brexit referendum.

There's speculation that had more young people voted, then the Brexit result might well have turned out different. ( Reuters: Dylan Martinez )

In the case of the Scottish referendum, a healthy 75 per cent of 16- and 17-year-olds who were extended the right to vote for the first time chose to do so.

So successful was this push to lower the voting age in fact that popular support to extend 16- and 17-year-olds the vote almost doubled following the referendum.

Contrast this with what happened during the Brexit referendum, which restricted the vote to Britons aged 18 years and above.

Through a historic, generational decision that would disproportionately affect Britain's young, less than two-thirds or 64 per cent of 18 to 24-year-olds turned out to cast a vote.

There's speculation that had more young people — including 16- to 17-year-olds — voted, then the result might well have turned out different.

Young people have shown themselves more than ready

Australians concerned that lowering the voting age might set a dangerous precedent need not worry.

Austria, Germany, Norway, Argentina, and Brazil are all examples of electoral democracies that have successfully extended 16-year-olds the vote.

In the decade since the Australian Parliament last considered the notion of lowering the voting age, children and young people have also shown themselves more ready than ever for the responsibilities that come with voting.

The school children who stepped up in the wake of the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, earlier this year did what no-one else seemed capable of doing.

From Washington to London to Sydney, children and teenagers banded together in a global act of solidarity that reminded us how much we miss when we ignore their political insights.

Sorry, this video has expired Emotions run high as students demand gun law reform after 17 killed in Florida

As 17-year-old Nicola Hames put it in her submission to the parliamentary inquiry now considering Senator Steele-John's bill:

"I want to make an informed choice, having examined each movement of all candidates closely, but I am not allowed, and my parents can make a quick few marks, go get a sausage sizzle, and be none the wiser about the decision they have just made, which could potentially put people at risk."

If there's anything that our political system needs now, it may just be more voices and votes like Nicola's.

Mark Chou is associate professor of politics at the Australian Catholic University and Lesley Pruitt is senior lecturer in international relations at Monash University.

Their latest book is Young People, Citizenship and Political Participation: Combatting Civic Deficit?