The millennial moment has arrived

According to a study by Abacus Data, young Canadians — long assumed to be apathetic and uninvolved — were the driving force behind our country’s dramatic change of government in 2015.

Participation by young voters in the last election increased more than any other age group over the 2011 election: 67 per cent of voters aged 18- 25 showed up at the polls, up from 55 per cent four years earlier. Breaking the numbers down further, 58 per cent of 18- to 20- year- olds voted, as did 71 per cent of 21- to 23- yearolds and 72 per cent of 24to 25- year- olds. And young voters’ preferences changed dramatically from one election to the next. In 2011, 36 per cent cast their ballots for the New Democratic Party, 24 per cent for the Conservatives and 17 per cent for the Liberals. But in 2015, 45 per cent of young voters chose the Liberals, 25 per cent the NDP and 20 per cent the Conservatives.

So what motivated young voters to come out to vote — and to vote the way they did? The answers likely lie in the differences between the 2011 and 2015 electoral climate. While the Conservatives entered both campaigns as the governing party, in 2011 they had governed for six years with two minority governments, while by 2015, they had been in the majority for four years. That majority led the Tories to govern differently: one frequently got the sense they were packing in all the legislation they were unable to pass in the previous two minorities.

The Conservatives pursued an aggressive tough-oncrime agenda, went heavy on national security issues and were repeatedly criticized for being “anti- democratic” for crafting giant omnibus bills.

For an electorate that hadn’t seen a majority government since 2003, Tory rule felt heavy- handed. For young people who are more disposed to challenge authority than their elders, it probably felt downright Orwellian — a message further drummed into them by public- sector educators, the media and the opposition parties.

It also didn’t help that the Tories were beset by the Mike Duffy affair and other scandals, which tarnished the credibility of prime minister Stephen Harper. Add to this the fact that the Tories had been in office nine years — in the case of firsttime voters, half their lives — and it was no wonder that young voters were itching for change.

And in 2015, compared to 2011, change was readily apparent. In 2011, NDP leader Jack Layton had more youthful appeal than the Liberals’ Michael Ignatieff and Harper. But in 2015, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau presented an even starker contrast to both Harper and NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair. Trudeau was a decade younger and championed issues that resonated with youth voters, their experiences and their values, including abortion rights, loosened marijuana laws, the strength of divers- ity and “doing politics differently.”

For a while, the other parties tried to play this to their advantage, assuming that standing beside their seasoned leaders, Trudeau would look like a schoolboy who was ill-prepared for the job of prime minister. The Conservatives ran ads to this effect, portraying Trudeau as “not ready.” with employers saying that “prime minister is not an entry level job.” While the ads were seen as successful in the first half of the campaign, the “notready” rhetoric may have backfired with young voters on election day. At a seminar I gave last year at Concordia University on political marketing, one of the students remarked that she didn’t like the TV spots because job interviewers are always telling young people they aren’t ready for the positions and responsibilities they seek — a fact that made her more likely to vote for Trudeau.

And six months into Trudeau’s majority, they would vote for him still. According to Abacus, 57 per cent approve of the government’s performance, 25 per cent neither approve nor disapprove, and only 18 per cent disapprove.

So what does this mean for the opposition parties? At its recent convention, the NDP pinned its hopes on the Leap Manifesto, a rewriting of Das Kapital in environmental clothing tailored to a younger, greener demographic. The party also dumped Mulcair, paving the way for a leader who is not only less centrist, but of a dif- ferent generation.

As for the Conservatives, t hey also have youthful leadership candidates on offer — all the current aspirants are in their mid- to late40s — but also the opportunity to make a longer- term change at their upcoming convention by establishing a national youth wing. Back in 2003, Reform elements purged the party of “special interests” that existed in the former Progressive Conservative party, including the youth wing. Unfortunately, this eliminated the “safe space” for the disruptive idealists a party needs to rejuvenate itself, in favour of the career politicians and staffers who see advantage in toeing the party line to advance their careers.

Unless they connect with millennials, the road ahead will be difficult for the opposition parties. Currently, more young people are prepared to vote Liberal than NDP or Tory. The other parties need to give them a reason to switch — not by bribing them with their own money, but by inspiring them and tapping into their values. For both the left and the right, this doesn’t mean abandoning their principles, but finding where they intersect with the future.

YOUNG PEOPLE PLAYED A LARGE ROLE IN GETTING THE LIBERALS ELECTED. IF THE TORIES WANT THIS TO CHANGE, THEY HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO.