Fewer than 40 per cent of people aged 18 to 24 voted in the Amsterdam and Northern Ireland referendums, the Referendum Commission has reported.
A survey carried out by the commission also shows that more than half (56 per cent) of those under 40 failed to vote, compared with only 32 per cent of those over 40. The figures present a particularly stark contrast between 18- to 24-year-olds, of whom 38 per cent voted, and 55- to 64-year-olds, where the turn-out was 75 per cent.
The overall turn-out of 56.2 per cent is described by the commission as "disappointingly low". In the survey, the most common excuse given by older people who failed to vote was that they did not understand the issues, while the main reason given by younger non-voters was that they were "too busy".
The figure compares with a 66 per cent turn-out in the 1997 general election, and 62 per cent in the 1995 referendum on divorce. Fewer than 30 per cent voted in the 1996 referendum on the bail laws, however.
The findings are contained in the commission's formal report on the referendums, presented yesterday to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Mr Dempsey.
In a section headed "some criticisms", the document concludes that not enough information was available on the Amsterdam Treaty. With "144 pages of legalistic text", the treaty was "impenetrable", the commission says; it suggests this was a contributory factor in the 33,000 spoiled votes in the Amsterdam poll, twice the figure for the Northern Ireland referendum.
Exacerbating this problem, the role of the commission in presenting both sides of the argument was "no substitute for full-blooded public debate on the issues", according to the report, which adds that the operations of the commission should not inhibit public debate.
"Nor, in the commission's view, should the Supreme Court judgment in the McKenna case inhibit public debate. That judgment does not prevent Ministers and politicians actively engaging in public debate; it simply prevents public monies being spent disproportionately putting just one side of the argument."
But the report rejects criticisms that it gave equal weight to views which, especially in the Northern Ireland referendum, were espoused by groups representing only a tiny minority of voters. The commission "cannot anticipate the outcome of the referendum", the report says.
The study shows the commission spent almost £2.2 million on the Amsterdam Treaty, including £403,000 on printed publications and £199,000 on radio and TV broadcasts.
But it concedes that only half of those surveyed recalled receiving written material on the Amsterdam Treaty, and only "a small proportion" of these claimed to have read it. And while noting that the referendum was generally considered a difficult challenge for the commission, the report also admits that the information campaign did not catch the public imagination.
The survey findings suggest that by contrast with the Amsterdam Treaty, "there was an overestimation of awareness of understanding of the issues concerning Northern Ireland and a clear lack of engagement among the public in relation to the detail of the proposals".
Opinions "were often emotional rather than reasoned", with a simple desire for peace overwhelmingly dominating the thoughts of Yes voters.
