About those "kids..."

First of all, people should stop referring to them as kids.  The young politicians elected on May 2nd are adults.  Young adults, but certainly not kids.  This word difference matters because it is causing people to mix two very separate issues:  age and qualifications.

Some use the term "kids" to imply that they aren't qualified simply because of their age.  That's, of course, nonsense.  Many younger people have managed to pack a lot of experience, education, and knowledge into a few years.

We also have some people using the term "kids" to excuse things that have nothing to do with age: "the kids are alright," "give the kids a chance," all implying that any criticism is due to their age and/or should be tempered because of their age.

You can't have it both ways.  If age doesn't matter - and I don't believe it should - then the same expectations when it comes to qualifications for new candidates should apply to them as they would to any newcomer.  If you start excusing them because they are "kids," then you are saying that they are not as capable as the real gown-ups, in which case they shouldn't be representing Canadians in Parliament.

Another problem with going on about the kids is that serious issues get lost in the whole quit picking on the kids thing.  As kirbycairo pointed out to me, the problems with token candidates in write-off ridings would not have come out as it did if so many of the winners had not been so young.

That's true, but it doesn't mean we should dodge the problems that surfaced (nor is kirbycairo suggesting that).  There are problems with parties running candidates who aren't properly screened, not suitable to the riding they are running in, candidates who don't bother campaigning, and lack of engagement with and from the public.  Those aren't age issues, and they aren't limited to any one party.

As for young people running and winning, terrific.  We should demand the same from them we would of any candidate, though, or eventually, after a few more elections, overall quality could suffer.

Having younger, qualified politicians is a very good thing.  It encourages more young people to be involved in politics; it helps represent needs and will of the younger segment of society; it delivers a new perspective.

h/t Dammit Janet!  for another example of the invisible candidate phenomenon.  A CPC member, in this case.