What was the date, location, and audience for the remark '14 was old enough to decide' and who reported it first?

1. What the supplied reporting actually covers: Children’s Day and unrelated November speeches

Multiple items in the results describe activities and speeches tied to India’s Children’s Day on November 14 — guidance for school speeches and background on why Nov. 14 is observed (commemorating Jawaharlal Nehru) appear in LiveMint, Mashable India, India TV and The Economic Times ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. Other entries are unrelated transcripts or political coverage (e.g., Zohran Mamdani victory speech, Fox News Election Day live updates, IMF transcript, COP30 speech) but none quote or source the phrase “14 was old enough to decide” ^{[5] [6] [7] [8]}.

2. Why the phrasing matters — ambiguous context and multiple possible meanings

The phrase “14 was old enough to decide” could plausibly be about age of consent, voting or political education, juvenile autonomy, or a specific policy proposal (notably debates about lowering voting ages to 16 or engaging youth aged 14+ in civic lessons). The supplied items include references to democratic education and votes-at-16 discussions in UK youth forums, which show a context where claims about age thresholds appear — but those sources discuss rolling out democratic education to those aged over 14 and votes at 16, not the exact quoted line ^[9]. Therefore, while the theme of “what age is old enough” appears in reporting, the exact remark is not present in the provided material ^[9].

3. Who would typically report such a line — and what the search shows

If a public figure had said “14 was old enough to decide” in a speech, mainstream outlets or transcript repositories usually record the exact wording and attribute date, venue and audience. In the supplied results, transcripts and speech coverage exist (e.g., election victory speech transcripts, government speech transcripts), but none contain this phrase or an attribution for it ^{[6] [8]}. Therefore, the current collection provides no first reporter or originating outlet for that sentence (not found in current reporting).

4. Related, verifiable examples in the results and how they differ

• Youth and voting debates: The UK Youth Parliament and reporting about democratic-education proposals mention preparing 14+ students for votes at 16 — that is about education rollout rather than claiming age 14 itself is sufficient to decide in elections ^[9].
• Children’s Day material: Several India-focused items explain that Nov. 14 is celebrated as Children’s Day and offer sample speeches — these are contextual, ceremonial, and do not argue for a decision-age of 14 ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}.
• Political speeches and transcripts in the results cover electoral victories and international addresses, but none include the quoted line or an equivalent policy statement about age thresholds ^{[5] [6] [8]}.

5. Limitations and recommended next steps for verification

The main limitation is the dataset: you provided a set of search results that do not contain the phrase or its attribution. To find the date, location, audience and first reporter for “14 was old enough to decide,” check primary sources where the quote would appear — full transcripts, video/audio of the speech, or an original news story that first published it. Search keywords to try next: the exact quote in quotation marks, the purported speaker’s name (if known), and combinations like “14 was old enough to decide speech [name/place/date]” across news outlets, transcript databases, or social-media posts that might have first shared the clip. If you give me a suspected speaker or more context (country, event, approximate date), I can re-run a targeted search of the provided sources.

6. What to watch for — misinformation and attribution risks

Quotes can be paraphrased or taken out of context; a line like “14 was old enough to decide” could be a summary by a reporter, a paraphrase, or an isolated clause from a longer sentence. When verifying, prefer original audio/video or an official transcript and check who first published it — eyewitnesss, local outlets, wire services, or social platforms can differ in reliability and motive. The supplied material shows varied focus and agendas (e.g., celebratory Children’s Day pieces, partisan election coverage, fringe claims like Dinar Chronicles) — so source type matters for credibility ^{[10] [5] [1]}.

If you can supply a suspected speaker, country, or event, I will examine the provided results again for a closer match and cite any direct source that contains the line.