The Times finds it “hugely significant” editorially (July 25) that new (meaning young) voters are “more inclined to vote for the Nationalist Party than for the Labour Party”. That is, according to the results of a survey. The paper then seeks to find the reason for this but hardly scratches the surface in its quest, though it says that the survey findings merit a deep analysis.

I do not think it is significant at all. The young have stipends, many go to the University in their car and binge drinking in Paceville. Most have all the money they need for their excesses and carry no burdens. They sleep soundly, during the day. Unlike their parents, who cosset them, they do not have to foot the cost of their way of life, the exorbitant energy bills and the expense of daily life.

All that many see is the shallow glitz of the party in government. The Isle of MTV. What do they care that we are in danger of being swamped by the debt entered into by a recklessly spendthrift government, or that the failed public transport reform cost so many, many millions of our tax money, or that a very costly, state-of-the-art hospital is not sufficient for its purpose, or that we are having a new Parliament building, costing so many millions and which will not do anything better than it did in the old?

While many are not making ends meet and are having their power supply cut.

And so on, and on.

Neither does The Times point out these facts to “the young”, happening under a government to which The Times is in thrall, to maybe open their eyes. All that readers read in The Times are cheap digs at the Labour Party, which do not even fit in the context of the writing (such as: is it a party or a movement?) and notions of “better job prospects under the Nationalists” – even as unemployment is on the rise.

It’s only when the young take on their responsibilities in life that they find they cannot cope. Then they come to their senses. That is why the older age groups are turning to the PL. They see that a change is needed.

Only “the young”, and The Times, do not see that.