National photo IDs?

You could circumvent the need for photo ID by applying for a postal vote. Then you don’t even need to go to the polling station.

As I need to prove my identity to fly, to get free bus travel, to claim benefits, to open a bank account, I don’t see an issue with voter ID.

There may not be much voter fraud but we don’t look for it

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/apr/05/politics.localgovernment

Voter ID isn’t just about “proving your identity”, in the same way as for opening a bank account or claiming benefits. As for flying… you’d be amazed how many people can’t afford a passport in the UK.

You’d have to give Doris a name and address which is on that specific list, you’d need to know the specific local polling station assigned to the address in question.

And the more you do it the more chance there is of you being rumbled. I reckon I know 80% of the voters in my Polling Station. Not a fool proof system but still a good chance I will catch you out.

In summary, you would have to work very hard and be very lucky to fiddle a tiny number of votes.

On a similar line to what someone else said… issue passports free to everyone, automatically, but don’t insist on them being carried while in the UK… and then you can require them to be being presented when voting. Don’t demand voter ID before issuing everyone with appropriate, cost free, hassle free, delay free, bureaucracy free ID, otherwise it is a barrier to voting.

There may not be much voter fraud but we don’t look for it

Your example is rather telling.
Firstly its postal voting. So photo id wouldnt help.
Secondly looking at it it was done on a large enough scale to count which also meant a large enough scale to be noticed. To significantly swing things chances are you will start using people who are intending to vote votes.

Many of my customers in the postoffice don’t have photo ID – we have to refuse services for many things. Its become more and more of a requirement in society. But I don’t think it’s necessarily a good thing. Especially for voting where there are so many other ways of voter verification.

I’ve had a photo ID since i moved to Sweden. It’s not a requirement but it makes life a lot easier. You can get a driving licence (about 40 quid i think) a passport (70 quid) or if you don’t want or need either of those, or aren’t eligible, you can get an ID card, which last i looked was about 12-15 quid.

The only think that’s compulsory is the personnummer that’s printed on the card. That ties everything together, multiple databases, tax status, employment, medical, driving licence, home ownership, address…

Having done a days stint at a polling station, I wouldn’t think it’s that hard to cast your vote, so long as you know the name and address of someone who isn’t voting, go home change of clothes and cast their vote for them of your choice.

I’m good at recognising faces but couldn’t garantee that in the course of a day and 2000 people that I would spot someone coming in twice.

However this is a ploy to make it harder to vote, we need more people to engage and this is another step to making it harder to engage surely it could be done digitally by now.

Election official are concerned and believe that this may lead to judicial challenges over the result of elections

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/nov/10/delay-uk-voter-id-checks-or-face-election-result-challenges-officials-warn

surely it could be done digitally by now

Indeed.

The thing with all this is that they want to mandate ID without putting the systems in place first. This is to stop certain people voting. They are trying to scam up coming elections. If ID really is needed to ensure fair elections, then sort the systems that would give everyone proof of ID first, before insisting on ID being presented. And no, those private “Citizens Cards” aren’t suitable at all. No more suitable than a CostCo card.

surely it could be done digitally by now

and this runs an assumption you can afford a computer/mobile etc. or the ability to go to a secure place like a library to use theirs, so we’re back to the hit to poorer people.

Worked on voting systems and backend coding for elections for many years in a previous life. Its not broken. Its not 100% secure, as like people say, there is potential to vote if you know name/address but its remerkably efficient for all people at the moment.

I’ve already got a passport and driving licence with photos, are they not photo I’d?

I’ve had a photo ID since i moved to Sweden. It’s not a requirement but it makes life a lot easier. You can get a driving licence (about 40 quid i think) a passport (70 quid) or if you don’t want or need either of those, or aren’t eligible, you can get an ID card, which last i looked was about 12-15 quid.

The only think that’s compulsory is the personnummer that’s printed on the card. That ties everything together, multiple databases, tax status, employment, medical, driving licence, home ownership, address…

Thats exactly what I want to happen.
Still don’t really think it needs presenting to allow you to vote though.

Twodogs
Full Member

But the fact is other countries have them (see Spain, above) and no-one is suggesting Spain is a police state.

True. But then here it’s being mooted specifically as a way to disenfranchise voters. Having a national card is one thing, wanting to introduce it for shitty reasons is another. Motivation is very important here.

And this is a government that’s constantly trying to criminalise protest and dissent, making strikes harder, etc etc. So it’s appropriate to see it in the same light.

I’ve already got a passport and driving licence with photos, are they not photo I’d?

Yes. You’ll be able to vote with them.

Those who don’t have either kr anything similar, and there are hundreds of thousands, will not be able to engage on our “democratic” process.

Just to counter the raving lefties as started by TJ. Might I suggest it is aimed at hindering the most important section of society. The older ones who know what the hell is going on, not the youngester who have all the ideas but no sodding clue.

Raving leftie? I have it on good authority ( Ernie) that I am ” some sort of pale pink wishy washy liberal”*

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
* I’m actually a dark green but hey ho 🙂

“and this runs an assumption you can afford a computer/mobile etc. or the ability to go to a secure place like a library to use theirs, so we’re back to the hit to poorer people.”
Twaddle spouted for a polical , and there fore disgusting and immoral, reason. I see dozens of familesi daily claiming poverty. Every single one of them has a fancy phone and an arm full of tats. Thats up to you and no reflection on you as a person but if you can afford that you are not poverty stricken.

The older ones who know what the hell is going on, not the youngester who have all the ideas but no sodding clue.

Age doesnt necessarily bring wisdom. For example a cursory investigation of this idea would show the obvious problem that old people vote tory. So are you arguing the tories are deliberately trying to disenfranchise those geniuses who vote for them?
Needless to say the tories arent that stupid hence why the built in privileges for oaps in terms of using their travel cards etc so they can keep the votes rolling in.

True. But then here it’s being mooted specifically as a way to disenfranchise voters. Having a national card is one thing, wanting to introduce it for shitty reasons is another. Motivation is very important here.

Absolutely agree. My original question was really to understand other views on ID cards in general assuming a theoretical problem free, free to everyone solution. Personally, I have no problem with the idea of them…but the devil is in the detail

I see dozens of familesi daily claiming poverty. Every single one of them has a fancy phone and an arm full of tats. Thats up to you and no reflection on you as a person but if you can afford that you are not poverty stricken.

Oh dear. Kicked off the Daily Mail forums, were you?

Very angry. Why?

Photo ID?
When I was Mr Mackay (prison officer) I worked on visits often. I’d say the vast majority of prison visitors had some form of photo ID.
I’m not being prison visitor-ist here!

No idea what that has to do with anything mind.

Insane? The system they have designed is completely, clinically sane. Your every move tracked, traced. It is beautifully efficient. All for your own safety, comrade. Because governments do, and always have cared about keeping you safe.

Every single one of them has a fancy phone and an arm full of tats. Thats up to you and no reflection on you as a person but if you can afford that you are not poverty stricken.

You got a spec list of those phones? Cos they all look pretty much the same, and vary wildly in cost. As for the tats, maybe the had a windfall a number of years ago?

Judging peoples financial situation today by something they may have bought years ago is ridiculous.

… the most important section of society. The older ones who know what the hell is going on, not the youngester who have all the ideas but no sodding clue.

Alternatively, the senile old goats who will be dead in a couple of years, or the youngsters will have to deal with the fallout from their shit for the next 70.

I see dozens of familesi daily claiming poverty.

Do you? Do you work in a benefits office?

Every single one of them

Every single one of them? Do they? Are you sure?

has a fancy phone

Why are you going around checking the specs on people’s phones? You can get a fancy-looking phone from CeX et all for a few quid. Are you looking through the windows to see if they have a telly as well?

and an arm full of tats.

Maybe they’re your important members of society that got them done 40 years ago when they were better off, then fell on harder times?

Can you really not see what you’re saying here, are you that blinkered? You’re arguing that if people don’t have much money then they shouldn’t be allowed the occasional nice thing. Maybe that “fancy phone” is the one thing of value that they own. Maybe it was a hand-me-down gift. You just don’t know, you have no way of knowing what anyone’s circumstances are.

Sneering at those worse off than yourself is not an admirable quality. Nor a pleasant one.

Also phones are pretty much essential to claim benefits

Also phones are pretty much essential to claim benefits

Is that why he’s complaining about them?

Seems like a very clear Tory ploy to make it harder to vote.

As has been said this will likely affect non-Tory voters to a greater extent.

National ID card? Unnecessary. Unwanted. Unaffordable. It would be as pointless an exercise now or in the future as it was with Blair.

Just to counter the raving lefties as started by TJ. Might I suggest it is aimed at hindering the most important section of society. The older ones who know what the hell is going on, not the youngester who have all the ideas but no sodding clue.

Top satire!

As has been said this will likely affect non-Tory voters to a greater extent.

Assuming it was free why would it?

Shouldn’t voting be made more difficult anyway .. surely people shouldn’t be allowed to vote unless they actually have some understanding what they are voting for?

Also phones are pretty much essential to claim benefits

Is that why he’s complaining about them?

Amazes me that no-one seems to be complaining about the need to own intrusive ID/device like a phone vs a photocard for voting?

Shouldn’t voting be made more difficult anyway .. surely people shouldn’t be allowed to vote unless they actually have some understanding what they are voting for?

So you’re advocating a test rather than ownership of an object, ok – would this be a theory, practical or both test?

Sneering at those worse off than yourself is not an admirable quality. Nor a pleasant one.

Eloquently put @Cougar (the whole post not just the quotation).

Shouldn’t voting be made more difficult anyway .. surely people shouldn’t be allowed to vote unless they actually have some understanding what they are voting for?

Yep, let’s roll it back to prominent upstanding members of society – just titled land owning men like the good old days.  Can’t have poor people, the yoof and ladies with heads full of fluffy kittens deciding such weighty matters.

So you’re advocating a test rather than ownership of an object, ok – would this be a theory, practical or both test?

I honestly don’t know but the vast majority of voters seem to struggle with even knowing what the manifesto they are theoretically voting for is AND what it is they are voting against.

I don’t mean in any great detail, I mean beyond red top headlines and just putting a cross next to a name for a rosette colour.

It must be a vanishing small number of voters that have read ALL party manifesto’s… but ignoring that level of detail it seems like a tiny percentage of swing voters and a large number of people voting on misinformation

Maybe an independent organisation (like OBR) should pass a 1/2 page summary of facts and misleading “factiods” for each party manifesto and they get tested on those?

blokeuptheroad

Yep, let’s roll it back to prominent upstanding members of society – just titled land owning men like the good old days.

Pretty sure they all mostly vote already… and aren’t changing

Can’t have poor people, the yoof and ladies with heads full of fluffy kittens deciding such weighty matters.

Which matters?
Do you think when the Tory party sends a minibus to the retirement homes to ferry the retirees to the polling station they have any clue what is in the manifesto or what it means?

“I had to wait 6 hours at the hospital and Boris is building 50 new ones and employing loads of new nurses”

Steve, you’re really the last person who should be judging anyone for a lack of comprehension of factual matters.

Maybe an independent organisation (like OBR) should pass a 1/2 page summary of facts and misleading “factiods” for each party manifesto and they get tested on those?

Every voter in the country being tested, and having their test scored before voting?  The scale of the costs and bureaucracy would be enormous! That’s after you surmount the bunfights and arguments between the parties over the nature/fairness of the questions.  Once the questions were released, how would you stop the the answers being shared? Unless you envisage it being done in the polling station – poll clerks being invigilator and examiner too?

The current system isn’t perfect, but it’s the fairest – everyone gets a vote, without barriers.  It comes back to the Churchill quote:

‘Democracy is the worst form of government, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time’.

The moment you start limiting who can vote, based on some arbitrary ‘test’ (selection process), it isn’t democracy anymore.

The moment you start limiting who can vote, based on some arbitrary ‘test’ (selection process), it isn’t democracy anymore.

Having the list of candidates and then a list of one manifesto promise from each party and having to chose the right one for your candidate does have a certain appeal.
Or maybe go back to when the party wasnt mentioned so you would have to know the candidates name (although would need to solve the problem of people matching names which was why they got added).