please dont shout, just asking - who doesnt have ID these days, really? and why would it happen to be all one type of voter? Presumably you need ID to work, to drive, to have a bank account, to get benefits - what am i missing, please enlighten me. thanks, appreciate it if you didnt shout.
please dont shout, just asking – who doesnt have ID these days, really? and why would it happen to be all one type of voter? Presumably you need ID to work, to drive, to have a bank account, to get benefits – what am i missing, please enlighten me. thanks, appreciate it if you didnt shout.
Apart from drive you don't don't need photo I'd for any of those things. I know this because my sister doesn't - it's a bit of a pain to get access to some stuff but perfectly possible to live without it
It's all about what type of ID they're accepting. It's seems to have been selectively chosen to favour Tory demographics, like the Bus Pass/Student Travel Card example above..
That the demographic least likely to have photo I.D. are also the least likely to vote Tory.
There's a poster about needing ID at the entrance to the Fruit Market in Bristol, it's been replaced a few times after it was daubed with a more suitably NSFW sweary version a few times. They've left the brambles grow over it as a natural barbed wire since the last replacement.
I can’t wait for my next Poll Clerk stint and all the people getting assey about this 🙄😔😔😔😔
My local polling clerk works at the local shop and he's bricking it at the prospect of turning away some of the locals who will most definitely not have any legal ID.
The reason the Tories will net gain on this is that they have auch higher postal voter take up than Labour, because of both age and wealth profile of voters - older voters much more likely to hold postal votes
Locally we've been encouraging people to take up postal votes.
As well as no ID, there will be lots of people who will not realise the ID issue but have ID, who bowl up to polling stations without ID , get turned away and can't be arsed to go back. We have enough trouble getting people out to vote in the first place
The whole thing stinks
I listened to a podcast recently (can’t remember which one) where they considered this issue. General consensus was that it was unnecessary, would probably have a noticeable effect on turnout but didn’t really favour one party over another. It’s basically a “change in behaviour” and older people tend to find that more of a challenge (even if they have ID they don’t tend to carry it and aren’t used to producing it to vote) but younger folk/minorities etc may be less likely to have some forms of ID.
One thing we can be sure of is that pollsters will be looking hard for any evidence that it favours one or other party. So we’ll soon find out.
like the Bus Pass/Student Travel Card example
Is that UK wide? I thought I heard something about it being a London thing but may have misheard
... roverpig - not convinced, we are investing a lot of time making sure our prospective voters know about this whilst the Tories do bugger all
Is that UK wide? I thought I heard something about it being a London thing but may have misheard
Definitely a thing here in Wales as the Welsh Assembly have had to assure students that they won't be turned away if they try to use their various student ID's.
- in person voter fraud doesn't happen, beyond myth making anecdotes
- postal vote fraud has been shown to happen, and prosecutions have occurred
- change the rules to push people away from in person voting to postal votes
Who does that make sense to? No-one. Unless you run a business which provides services for postal voting.
Anyway, I think it's too late for May, but GET YOUR POSTAL VOTE ready for future elections... it's not worth risking something happening on the day of the ballot that stops you from voting in person, like leaving your wallet at work or similar. As for young people... get your provisional driving license on day one, even if you never intend to drive. Yes, it costs, but voting is no longer free... deal with it. You'll need it for clubbing soon anyway.
Ah so you need a passport or a driving licence specifically? Ok. Yeah a passport is 80 odd quid and a bit of drama to get I guess.
Ok. Yeah a passport is 80 odd quid and a bit of drama to get I guess.
I’m sure I’ve seen ads for a free voter ID?
Ah so you need a passport or a driving licence specifically?
No, there are other things being provided, and for free.. but that's exactly the kind of thing you're going to lose between votes... because what else would you use it for? No one's going to bother with that pointless red tape. Remember the Citizen IDs provided for youngsters to prove their age? Utter waste of time.
Genuinely looking forward to seeing @daveylad’s voter fraud info.
Well, I would just like to say, that I for one, am extremely glad...
...that I wasn't holding my breath 😳
There is obviously only one reason why the government have introduced voter ID, they feel that it will benefit them, they certainly wouldn't be doing it if they thought it would disadvantage them.
It will of course affect the turnout, some people, an yet unknown number, will turn up and not be able to vote. But I am not convinced that it will necessarily benefit the Tories.
I believe that any sort of ID with a photo will be acceptable, there really can't be that many people without any ID with a photo. Anyone who hasn't is probably the sort of person who isn't likely to be registered to vote anyway imo.
The people mostly likely to forget to take ID imo are dotty old dears, I can't see that would give the Tories an advantage.
Btw why is widely assumed the daveylad must be a 'troll'? However unpopular this idea might be it really isn't feasible to assume that everyone must be opposed to it and the only people to express support must therefore be trolls.
There will obviously be people who think that it is a good idea, why would it not include anyone on stw?
Long overdue. Should cut down on voter fraud in certain areas.
So, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Georgia and Arizona…
Or did you have somewhere else in mind?
who doesnt have ID these days, really?
Well, my late partner wouldn’t have been able to, her passport had run out, she didn’t have a current driver’s license, because of health issues, (seizures), and she didn’t need ID for anything else. I do have a driver’s licence, which is fortunate because I’ve no idea where my old passport is, and wherever it is it’s got my birth certificate with it, just to complicate getting a replacement.
Yeah a passport is 80 odd quid and a bit of drama to get I guess.
Nobody will be able to get one after 3 April when the staff go on strike for 5 weeks. Currently sweating on mine arriving before they shut up shop. It's printed just awaiting despatch.
im happy to take my now expired Danish passport with holes cut in it with me and show them that first, will take my current one as backup
if I remember correctly we had a thread on this?
It is 💩.
What next? ‘Papers please’ when entering a civic building?
As long as I have my polling card that should be sufficient. I should not have to prove identity. If there is concern then the administrator must disprove my identity!
Seems we are moving towards lack of trust of the electorate. 😢
Since I have a postal vote and am ‘old’ it’s not a problem for me. For younger folks? A disaster in terms of representation.
there really can’t be that many people without any ID with a photo. Anyone who hasn’t is probably the sort of person who isn’t likely to be registered to vote anyway imo.
I'll disagree. My wife, for example. We've not moved house since photocard driving licences so still have the paper ones, and she doesn't travel abroad. She'll definitely vote (being a former Labour councillor). Fortunately she has a postal vote.
I’ll disagree. My wife, for example.
Surely your wife isn't "that many people"?
What next? ‘Papers please’ when entering a civic building?
I don't support the introduction of voter ID because I don't think it is necessary, and it just provides another obstacle to deal with, voting should be very easy.
However voter ID is the norm in most countries, not many countries don't require ID to vote.
So I don't think this represents some sort of slippery slope which will eventually result in having to show your papers to the Gestapo before boarding an intercity train.
I think people will simply adjust their behaviour so that taking ID to vote will be as normal and expected as an oyster card is for getting onto a bus.
In principle, sounds like a good idea, but not once you realise the real motivation and the practical effects.
For example you can use an Oyster card as ID, but only an over 60’s Oyster card. Why would that be then?
Apparently: "To get an over 60s Oyster card, you have to provide proof of identity, ie a valid passport. That's why it counts as valid ID, and not the standard over 18"
Apparently: “To get an over 60s Oyster card, you have to provide proof of identity, ie a valid passport.
I don't think it's that. The over 60s Oyster card is an entitlement, you can't lend to someone else, therefore it has a photo and the name of the card holder.
Pay as you go Oyster card you can lend to anyone, it isn't proof of identity.
However voter ID is the norm in most countries, not many countries don’t require ID to vote.
so is carrying identity papers. so ****ing what? other countries do it so it's ok? you get a polling card sent through the post. you pay council tax which triggers this. casting your vote should be as simple as it can be.
so is carrying identity papers. so **** what? other countries do it so it’s ok?
This isn't about carrying identity papers. It's about showing voter ID.
The next Labour government get repeal it if they want. It isn't complicated legislation.
it's an unnecessary barrier to voting and totally unwarranted.
Yeah I made that point in the paragraph before the one you quoted.
I don’t have any valid photo I.D. Old paper driving licence and a passport that expired many years ago with a photo of me when I was 19.
My voter certificate arrived last week a couple of days after applying online.
So I don’t think this represents some sort of slippery slope which will eventually result in having to show your papers to the Gestapo before boarding an intercity train.
You live in (or close to) an area policed by the Met. Are you unable to conceive of someone within that organisation abusing their power?
That's why all rational people should oppose the introduction of ID cards. Then there's the fabulous record of government IT projects. If we can't afford to do HS2 properly we certainly can't afford IBM or Fujitsu implementing a national ID scheme.
Btw why is widely assumed the daveylad must be a ‘troll’?
Because they log on, say something inflammatory then disappear. Their posting history is a jumble of Daily Mail soundbites and Facebook opinion...if they were not a troll they would surely back up their bile?
That the demographic least likely to have photo I.D. are also the least likely to vote Tory.
In the spirit of the this thread do we have any evidence for this?
Genuine question. Was this change opposed by other parties?
I’ll answer my own question
Huge evidence for marginalised groups not having id.
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/38405/html/
Did labour vote against it?
Everyone voted against it, apart from Conservatives and the DUP.
as normal and expected as an oyster card is for getting onto a bus
🤣🤣 come again? ‘Oyster card’? Useful in London, NBG elsewhere and thus I’d argue neither normal nor expected. Just as we should treat voter ID: not normal, should not be expected, and another hurdle to proper representation.
I worked in counter fraud years ago for a local authority. We did not have much investment in this area. Can't comment on how this has changed but I do know around 5 years ago there was a big recruitment drive in preparation for this. Not sure how much is in counter fraud but I've never seen a job advertised. They might have been internally advertised.
Voter fraud does exist as we were asked to help out on a case a long time ago. Voter cards were collected, some purchased or they were told who to vote for. It meant someone was elected who shouldn't have been. We wanted the results publishing but it was very political and kept quiet. In my experience it was more common on councillors rather than MPs but that might be down to levels of sophistication.
If you think that voter fraud doesn't happen or this is just a conservative plot to get re elected then you don't have a background in counter fraud investigations. Perhaps it just makes me very cynical.
The only problem I have with this is how badly it has been advertised and that a lot of people will turn up without sufficient ID. I'm not surprised they want a police presence. I'd also like to know what document examination training the staff have had. Last time I helped out on polling day a lot of staff were retired staff who used to work for the local authority. I suspect the first time this happens it will be very relaxed and get stricter as it gets embedded and people get used to it.
I don't understand what the resistance to ID is and making sure the results are reliable? Even with ID people will still be told who to vote for or be paid to vote for someone.
come again?
Yeah you heard correct, if it isn't repealed by the next Labour government and it becomes permanent taking ID when you go to vote will become as normal as remembering to take your oyster card before a bus journey.
I don't support the new rule because I believe that it will represent an unnecessary obstacle to voting for no good reason.
However to suggest that this represents some sort of move towards a police state, and darkly talk about the untrustworthiness of the Met, in relation to this, is absurd.
I don't know if there is one single EU country which doesn't require voter ID, would it be fair to suggest that the EU is some sort of police state?
I don’t understand what the resistance to ID is and making sure the results are reliable? Even with ID people will still be told who to vote for or be paid to vote for someone.
It’s a matter of balance. If you have some numbers on voter fraud that would be helpful.
But in the link I posted we are taking about thousands being turned away in just the trial areas against under a hundred cases of fraud across the whole country. If 7% don’t have the required id to vote that’s millions of people.
I entered this thread thinking voter id, what’s the problem, reducing corruption is a good thing. I have now changed my mind. So I’m open to additional information
Finally isn’t postal votes the big worry for fraud? This measures seems to increase postal voting. That makes no sense
Here is the link to the 2005 case were 900 postal votes were consisted suspicious and lead to a prosecution
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2010/sep/06/men-jailed-attempted-postal-vote-fraud
I don’t understand what the resistance to ID is and making sure the results are reliable? Even with ID people will still be told who to vote for or be paid to vote for someone.
So if it's not going to make a difference why go to the trouble?
So if it’s not going to make a difference why go to the trouble?
It's not as if the government has a track record of pointless distractions from bigger issues, is it?
It’s not as if the government has a track record of pointless distractions from bigger issues, is it?
Well obviously, I was asking in the context of Damascus' post.
In principle it's a good thing, in reality there will be lots of unintended consequences and its a solution to a problem we don't have. If we want to make this country less open to fraud and criminality let's start with the behaviour of our current politicians. There's plenty of real problems there that do need addressing.
Finally isn’t postal votes the big worry for fraud?
I would have thought so. During an election campaign many years ago I took a phone call from someone who claimed that their wife worked in a care home for the elderly, apparently she witnessed the manager organising the postal votes of the residents on mass to support the Tory candidate.
I passed the information onto the Labour Party election agent and to my surprise he said that he would only follow it up if Labour lost by a handful of votes. They didn't and it wasn't pursued.
Unless there is a good reason I don't think postal voting should be encouraged. Some people complain endlessly about politicians and then are too lazy to get their sorry arses down to the local polling station every few years to make a personal effort for democracy.
I think election day should always be on a Sunday btw, choosing a busy weekday makes no sense at all imo. Especially as schools are often used!
We have national ID here, the cheapest photo ID available (National ID card) was about 6 quid IIRC, and easily available from several sources.
Your driving licence and passport also include the same data, and are relatively easily available, if you meet the criteria. They're also cheap (~30 quid for a driving licence, ~60 for passport).
Even inserting myself into the system as an adult was incredibly easy.
If you have some numbers on voter fraud that would be helpful.
This is an old article, but highlights the issues raised at the time.
The problem with fraud is you only find fraud when you invest in counter fraud. If you have little or no counter fraud in place then fraud isnt a problem until it is. So there's no real numbers to back it up, just reviews and reports.
The more you look for it, the more you find.
Historically there hasn't been any real trained counter fraud in local authorities in voting. It's only when someone complains after the fact and if it didn't have an effect on the outcome then it's sometimes ignored. For example labour candidate did x, y and z but the conservatives won. Historically the only avenue was to refer suspicions to the police. I think that's changing now, investments have been made in anticipation of this new rule.
With regards to postal votes I suspect its one step at a time and that will develop as they understand the data and how much fraud they suspect. It will be based on resource to risk.
But in its final report of electoral fraud in the UK, the Commission rejected calls to restrict access to postal voting – which has been at the centre of many of the allegations – saying it would prevent many innocent people from casting their vote.
Personally I don't see what the difference is to preventing innocent people from voting. It should be a blanket policy but it's harder and more costly to introduce with postal votes.
There isn't a financial barrier to obtaining photo ID, but there is a knowledge barrier and a lack of understanding. Again, I don't think they've done a very good job on advertising and information upfront.
The scheme would allow voters who do not hold any of the existing forms of identity to apply for a “Voter Card” which would be issued free of charge to any elector
Implementing a Voter Card scheme across Great Britain would cost between £1.8m and £10.8m per annum, depending on the method of implementation.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/voter/voter-id/accepted-forms-photo-id
If you don't have an accepted form of photo ID
You can apply for a free voter ID document, known as a Voter Authority Certificate, if:
you don't have an accepted form of photo ID
you're not sure whether your photo ID still looks like you
you're worried about using an existing form of ID for any other reason, such as the use of a gender marker
You need to register to vote before applying for a Voter Authority Certificate.
Find out how to apply for a Voter Authority Certificate
The deadline to apply for a Voter Authority Certificate for the local elections in England on 4 May 2023 is 5pm on Tuesday 25 April 2023.
