Forum menu
Just because people do not currently have a form of ID does not mean they cannot get it if it is required. Simply spend the 4 years prior to an election improving the access to photo ID and encouraging people to acquire a photo ID.
This lot in charge will wait until the last few weeks before the election, announce a scheme run by a Donor and that scheme will then have so many delays and faults that the majority of the ID's will arrive late. There's also the issue of it relying on people to apply, that breeds voter apathy.
For any security measure you have to weigh up effectiveness vs usability and then also account for the risk factor.
If you block 1 case by using photo id but prevent 1000 people from voting it is a rather poor return on investment.Out of the voting options postal votes is far more vulnerable to misuse. Oddly enough though the tories dont seem interested in that. Why is that do you think?
Why are they going for the option which most impacts people who dont vote for them regardless of the low risk vs the more risky variant which people who vote for them use?
This echo's my thoughts. If the current system has 30m voters currently (65% turnout of 45m eligible) and only 100 attempted illegal votes in person then that ratio is so small that it's not worth considering statistically. If the ID system reduces the voter turnout by 2-3m or more then it actually makes the effect of the odd illegal vote have more effect, but the effect is still so tiny it doesn't matter therefore the whole scheme has just reduced the voter pool. Those voters who couldn't vote are far more likely to be from disadvantaged, poor or ethnic households that generally don't vote Tory. That's straight-out voter manipulation.
The issue of postal votes is far more open to abuse. The wife/husband can easily intercept their partner's vote or force them to vote a certain way. Deceased votes can be cast. Forms can be forged. But making that system more robust and harder to access would potentially rule out votes from the elderly who have trouble getting to the polling station on the day or people who live abroad, all traditionally Tory voters.
Even if it is all being introduced legitimately and without political bias (highly unlikely) it still favours Tory votes over other parties and on that point alone it should not be introduced.
£15 for a citizen card delivered within 21 days. Last for 3 years too.
But why insist on anyone getting one? And buying a new one for every general election?
What if you forget to take your (otherwise utterly useless) citizen card to work that day, and so can't vote after your late shift?
Remember, for other people £15 matters. Other people don't travel abroad. Other people dream of owning a car. Other people don't do a nice easy nine to five shift.
Far too many people here with the "it won't disenfranchise people like me, so it's fine" attitude... ignoring that that is the point of this move... to disenfranchise people who don't live a life anything like yours.
£15 for a citizen card delivered within 21 days. Last for 3 years too.
Good to know. I will go without food this week and buy a citizen card...
It is a lot of money to some, but photo ID can be useful for so many things. If someone is in an accident for example.
Having to pay is not ideal. It would be great if it was cheaper or free for some but where do you draw the line?
I'd draw the line at needing voter ID as it's a pointless concept in the UK unless the objective is to discourage voters from certain sections of society
I’ve only half read this thread because it’s moving to fast, but cross referencing a couple of points from Kelvin, would the same demographic that can’t afford to pay £15 for a card at every election be the same demographic that don’t typically register to vote? The poor/young etc. When I was skint in my younger years £15 wouldn't be in my disposable income, and I like to vote. There shouldn’t be an economic barrier to a democratic right.
would the same demographic that can’t afford to pay £15 for a card at every election be the same demographic that don’t typically register to vote?
There may well be a lot of overlap.... but why make it a bigger hoop to jump though to be able to use your vote? There seem to be no case for VoterID beyond... "it doesn't effect people like me, and I believe against all the evidence available that in person voterID is a problem that needs addressing". VoterID effects a lot of people very unlike them, and introducing it to solve a non-existent problem is voter suppression... pure and simple.
£15 for a citizen card delivered within 21 days. Last for 3 years too.
Good to know. I will go without food this week and buy a citizen card…
Beat me to it.
If the government requires us to have ID, they can pay for it out of general taxation rather than penalise those who can afford it the least.
VoterID effects a lot of people very unlike them, and introducing it to solve a non-existent problem is voter suppression… pure and simple.
Nice summary of the debate.
£15 for a citizen card delivered within 21 days. Last for 3 years too.
Poll Tax II : Now they’re after democracy
No, it’s not a lot of money to me, but it is a voting tax and therefore wrong.
it may be a lot of money to others, and it’s still wrong.
but it is a voting tax and therefore wrong.
Can't believe some people think that should be acceptable.
There shouldn’t be an economic barrier to a democratic right.
This puts it perfectly.
Given the UK Government attempts on IT Projects, this is already doomed. Add GDPR plus the logistics issue in, and it is dead. It is another 'good' idea that simply won't survive.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/05/heritage-foundation-dark-money-voter-suppression-laws/
History is written by the winners.
Or the referee... It seems
Nothing wrong with a members club requiring proof of membership (not a club I’d join, but hey). Utterly irrelevant to VoterID discussion.
Though it's a good illustration of a card being used to keep unwanted people out.
Paying for Tory/ Labour membership is enough to stop people voting in the respective leadership elections and paying for an ID card would be enough to stop people voting in national elections.
To be fair, I’d still be ranting if it somehow affected older, richer, white Tory voters as well.
Voter suppression is voter suppression
Totally agree, being against voter suppression isn't a partisan issue for me. The more people that vote, the better, whomever they vote for.
Stop answering the repeated bad faith question, just call them an idiot
This approach led to Brexit. You were either pro EU or labeled a racist idiot. Rather than educating people and changing minds we just cemented people's views by making them defensive.
I'll stick to answering questions with well reasoned and argued thoughts if that's OK.
This approach led to Brexit. You were either pro EU or labeled a racist idiot. Rather than educating people and changing minds we just cemented people’s views by making them defensive.
While we're busy agreeing with each other, this as well
If you read the first few hundred pages of the original Brexit thread you'll find some of us refrained from calling people idiots, engaged with the likes of Jamba and spent a lot of time and effort systematically countering the falacies with links to reliable sources. Did that change minds? Not a jot.
In real life the more reliable evidence I presented the more people became dismissive of anything reasoned and just barricaded themselves behind unchallengables such as racism worn as a badge of honour (edit: and giving a feeling of superiority) and contempt for foreigners.
There shouldn’t be an economic barrier to a democratic right.
There won’t be, if the nice trustworthy Johnson & Company see fit to provide everyone of voting age with a suitable ID card at no added cost to the recipient.
I've just thought.
If the government think that fraudulent is such a big issue as to require photo ID,
Why are they still in power when if their own argument is true they were put there by deception?
I agree with needing ID. There is no downside and it prompts people to get a valid photo ID that they might need for other things. There’s plenty of time to get some form of photo ID.
£15 for a citizen card delivered within 21 days. Last for 3 years too.
...
It is a lot of money to some, but photo ID can be useful for so many things. If someone is in an accident for example.
You've answered your own 'no downside' claim here, plenty of people don't have £15. In an era where we've been listening to people screaming about democracy and sovereignty for the last five years, you're supporting a "pay to vote" scheme. Are you sure about that?
Let's unpick the rest.
What "other things"?
How would you define as "plenty of time" to issue 55 million photo ID cards using a system that literally does not exist yet? We've been issuing passports for six hundred years now and it still takes three weeks to process as a rolling concern rather than suddenly having to do the entire country.
What good is it going to be in an accident? Are you expecting the ambulance staff to verify that you're not an illegal immigrant before starting a blood transfusion? I can write "my name is... in case of accident please contact..." on a Post-It in my wallet, it'll serve the same purpose and won't cost me fifteen quid.