One of the most enjoyable parts of my four terms in Parliament has been hosting local school groups who come here with parents and teachers, along with the 100,000 visitors who have a look through the place every year.
It's always good fun because they arrive here wide-eyed and forthright with their questions: "Do you live in this building? How much is the pay? Who don't you like in this place?"
But after all these visits over 12 years -- from littlies right through to year 13s -- I struggle to recall any questions (even with Crunchie bars on offer) which show any grasp of the real business of politics or the process of government.
So this is where the argument about connecting early before apathy sets in starts to go awry.
It's not apathy that is the barrier, it's actually a lack of understanding because before you start work, buy a house, enter a relationship or have children etc, you are only starting to grasp the relevance of politics in your life.
Not being a neurosurgeon, I had better skip the technicalities of brain formation before I have an avalanche of under-25s who may claim that I am implying that their thinking is all a bit fraught.
But making a choice at the ballot box requires some reasoning and rational thinking amid a huge amount of decisions which our young people have to make, many of which they won't get a second shot at -- leaving school, leaving home, joining the forces or starting a career.
Just because our laws allow people under 16 to do a lot of important things, it doesn't follow that they should be allowed to vote.
I agree that younger people need to have some interest in politics and there's a strong case to make politics a serious NCEA subject.
However, to give them the vote before they are educated and experienced in life enough to make truly informed decisions would be a disaster.
Children of this young age are hardly likely to have found their ideological positioning or anything like it, and allowing under-18s to vote is unlikely to result in them taking a sudden interest in political parties or election issues.
On the whole, our young people are concerned with specific issues and causes and so are politically active in other ways, through signing petitions and going on protests. And where will we draw the line? Will we be considering the vote for 14-year-olds soon?
The Children's Commissioner is quite right, in his role, to invite discussion which is relevant to that demographic, but I don't think a lowering of the voting age will do anything to benefit 16- to 18-year-olds or their long-term commitment to connecting with politics.
