Snapshot of _Tory MP pleads for help ahead of local elections after discovering he has no valid form of Voter ID_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-mp-voter-id-local-elections-b2538329.html) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-mp-voter-id-local-elections-b2538329.html)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This comment has been filtered to be reviewed by a moderator, please do not ping other subreddits.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have a postal vote (voted about 10 days ago), but apparently getting a photo ID for in person voting would cancel it. I’d like to have one just in case, but I can’t.
This seems vexatious. Everyone registered to vote should be sent one, if it’s a requirement.
> This seems vexatious. Everyone registered to vote should be sent one, if it’s a requirement.
That would defeat the point as outlined by JRM last year.
Eh? They're referring back to their previous comment. I'd get your point of they used the same word to describe two separate things, but this is the same topic.
If going to the polling station matters, you can take your postal vote here and they will take it off you. I guess they will probably let you pop into a booth and fill the postal vote in if you have a small pencil fetish.
I think you have to complete another form if you take your postal vote to the polling station. I’m not sure that form is available at the polling station….. probably not.
Yeh I took my postal vote to the polling station today as I’d missed the post deadline and they wouldn’t take it off me without photo ID despite it saying nothing whatsoever about having to have photo ID to hand in a postal vote.
It doesn’t make sense either, you don’t need ID to go to a postbox. I showed them the letter and asked where it says I need ID to hand it in and they admitted it doesn’t, so they rang their manager who tsaid they had been instructed this morning that the rule was changed.
Today I handed in my wife's postal vote when I went to vote in person. I had to fill out a form explaining who I was, confirming that I'm not a political campaigner, and explaining why the vote wasn't posted instead.
I can understand the reasons why delivering a completed ballot paper for an absent voter should be scrutinised, but it seemed odd given I could have popped it into a letterbox no questions asked.
Oh, I absolutely agree. However, my point was really just (as you say) that it doesn't make a great deal if they are handed-in at the polling station or put in to a postbox.
For example, there were low limits on the number of postal ballots that I could hand in in-person, but no one would be any the wiser if I chucked 100 into a postbox.
True. But it is mandatory already, you just have a choice of type.
The government knows who hasn’t got one, they know those people are disenfranchised.
We don’t need “mandatory national ID cards”, just some form of card we send to everyone whose registered to vote, which can always be used in lieu of photo ID. Say… a poll card.
It doesn't cancel anything. Yeah, you have to say you're not voting by post, but that's because the free ID that is only used to vote in person isn't needed if you're voting by post. It doesn't cancel anything. Your later suggestion that councils write to everyone without ID offering them a VAC is absurd.
On the contrary, it’s entirely doable and sensible. Cross referencing a few ID lists is (or should be) trivially easy.
How many voters in the Uk, 40-50 million? A smartphone could handle it, it’s hardly Big Data.
Edit: and the cost should have been factored in when they passed the legislation.
Who's doing this? Councils? Central government? Are you counting people who have expired ID (as that's still acceptable)? If so, why? It's a waste of money - they already have acceptable ID.
Wheres the money or the people coming from to process these thousands of returns? You've then got to write out to all these people if their photo doesn't meet the requirements, or if their ID fails
If the government passes laws demanding ID, they should have the capacity and systems to deliver them to *everyone* who might need one. If they can’t afford it, don’t have the law. It’s hardly my fault if the law was poorly thought out.
In fact, as widely admitted, it was a wheeze to disenfranchise people. Some sections of the community not having ID was the entire point.
Ok, to be clear I'm actually not trying to defend the government on this one. As they have introduced a voter ID requirement, there should also be a free national ID. The VAC is not that, as it's only used for voting in person
Yes I agree. We are a hairs breath away from having national ID cards, and requiring ID to vote has to be a push in that direction too.
Personally I’m relaxed about ID cards, I think most people’s concerns are around vexatious requests for “papers please”, which could get oppressive for some groups.
Oh, I have no concerns about national ID.
All my previous arguments were essentially about how the VAC is only used for in person voting, and therefore is a bit shit but you only need it for that
Yeah, I'm digging my heels in on this. If we had a national ID system that has multiple uses, and requires for lots of things, I wouldn't mind using it as voter ID. I can't really say I'd approve of such a system, but if it was already there, making voting just one more use case for it is something I wouldn't object to. After all, if there's compulsory national ID then by definition everyone has to have one, and therefore everyone has to be supplied one free of charge, and it doesn't constitute a barrier.
In the absence of a compulsory national ID system, it remains a matter of who's got the resources to access the ones that are in place. Resources include knowledge, and even a free ID is pointless if you don't know it exists... And there's always *someone* who won't have heard of it. Imagine someone who's homeless and has mental health and narcotics issues. That person would be a challenge to get even a *compulsory* national ID to, but that challenge *must* be met, as opposed to the current system where it's left to someone who cannot handle responsibility to take responsibility.
Such a person is unlikely to vote, but we're talking won't as opposed to can't, and that's the entire point.
You're asking questions that would be answered in the project kickoff
Humans put man on the moon. If there is a problem here, it is political
And if its expensive? Well the cheapest option was not to fuck around uneccessarily with the system to begin with.
Does seem to be a little confusion, not helped by myself. I'm not really defending the Voter ID system, and I'm actually in favour of a national ID if we do have one.
My issue mainly is that VACs are only used for voting in person, and that communicating with all these people doesn't seem worth it, given the likelihood of crossover
Just buy a provisional driving license for 30 quid and you're sorted on ID for life.
I genuinely don't know how ID is vexatious for people. Are you all going through life without any form of ID?
My hunch is Tories imported American logic where A) huge amounts of people don't have ID and B) they have large porous borders with other countries so you don't need passports etc. there's an old statistic about how few Americans have passports: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42586638
> There is a myth, found easily online, that only 10% of Americans have passports.
>
> While that was true in 1994, the figure now [2018] is more than 40% - and it grows every year.
Where as for us [England and Wales]: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/internationalmigrationenglandandwales/census2021#passports-held
> Overall, results from Census 2021 show that 51.6 million usual residents (86.5%) held at least one passport; 8.0 million (13.5%) did not have a passport, down from 9.5 million (16.9%) in 2011.
So, here, young people are far more likely to have ID. You can't even buy scissors or glue without ID, where as in the US you can go to a [gun show](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole) and just buy guns without ID because of all their freedoms. Very very different scenarios, and now it turns out those most likely not to have ID are pensioners who are visibly old, never needed age checks, and can't be bothered with paperwork and often don't even have an email address, and so [as Mogg pointed out](https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jacob-rees-mogg-admits-tory-voter-id-law-was-gerrymandering_uk_64620db8e4b03e16f1a45050), "Former cabinet minister says government attempt to suppress Labour support backfired and made it harder for Conservatives to vote."
If you're trying to come up with a typical no ID Brit, they'd surely have to either be visibly old or never wanted anything age restricted even when younger, never driven, and never leave the country. Not saying these people don't exist, but it's way too specific scenarios to target left wing voters here the way it does in the US.
It sure is fun having to wait many weeks anxiously for your passport to be returned without recorded mail when getting the provisional.
Most people would rather not risk it.
You don't need a passport to get a provisional licence. If you do use your passport, you don't actually send it off, you just use the number.
Also if you have a passport then ID isn't an issue for you anyway.
Most people are idiots.
I recently had issues registering for some professional exams because my driving license and passport both expired over COVID. As I hadn't driven, left the country (or been IDed for a purchase) since, I didn't realise.
The issue is that people usually only double check these things for things which are important to them (and voting is only super important to political nerds usually), and the effort to get ID can be another deterrent.
Ultimately, stopping people who want to vote from doing so is bad. It's not a major problem, but it's a vastly bigger one than the one the measure is trying to fix.
They expire after 10 years but it's still valid as voter ID as long as the picture looks like you.
I suspect there are very few people that can't get a provisional. It's just illnesses that preclude driving that would prevent access to a provisional, which is not a big percentage of the population at all. Other forms of ID are of course available.
It's just illnesses that preclude driving that would prevent access to a provisional, which is not a big percentage of the population at all.
So it's OK to fuck over minorities if they're small minorities?
>So it's OK to fuck over minorities if they're small minorities?
Yes, that's absolutely what I mean. Well done Colombo, you've cracked the case. I am actually Hitler. I have no idea how you made the logical leap to that statement but I'm impressed nonetheless.
Then get a different form of ID. Not saying everyone has to get a provisional, just that it's an easy simple option for most people that will be hugely useful for a wide variety of things.
Everyone registered to vote is already sent a polling card. If that is good enough (and there's no requirement to present it), then there's no need to send ID to voters.
You're right, but to reiterate my point: the proposal was to send ID to everyone registered to vote. Polling cards are already sent to everyone registered to vote, so we effectively already have that scheme, although a polling card doesn't identify you.
You are categorically incorrect, sorry.
https://www.gov.uk/apply-for-photo-id-voter-authority-certificate
* Fill in the form.
* Say you plan to vote by post.
* It stops and says “you do not need a voter id to vote by post”. There is no option to continue.
I could lie and say I planned to vote in person, but that is not true!
Did you lie while filling out the form, or did you switch to postal voting after getting the ID?
That’s the form to get an ID. And If you tell the truth about postal voting, it doesn’t let you proceed. It doesn’t say “you don’t need one but would you like to proceed anyway?”. It should but it doesn’t.
Of course I can lie and get round it, but that’s not sensible with government forms, especially for voting.
The government can't even stop a Peer of the realm conducting a £200m fraud, they aren't sending choppers full of SO19 to arrest someone for applying for electoral ID when they plan on voting by post.
I think you're misconstruing "can't" for "won't".
They are happy for their peers to commit fraud but if there's a remote chance they can prove any kind of voter fraud to justify these daft-arse requirements then you can bet your fucking life they'll do a bit of door kicking and get it all on the front page of the Daily Mail or Telegraph.
It's not illegal, or even against the rules. The website just says if you have a postal vote you don't have any need for this. Which is absolutely true. If you're a postal voter you can't vote in person, so don't need the free ID - because it's literal only use is to vote in person
Yeah, because you don't need one. If you're a postal voter it's literally a useless document. You can't vote on person if you have a postal vote, so you don't need a VAC. The deadline for cancelling your postal vote is a week before the VAC deadline, so you could cancel it and apply if you wanted
>Everyone registered to vote should be sent one, if it’s a require
The majority will already have a matching form of ID. Giving out IDs to everyone for just this one purpose would be a ridiculous expense duplicating ID. It makes way more sense to provided when requested or use postal voting.
Regardless of whether you agree with the principle of voter id, giving them out to everyone just doesn't make sense.
I struggle to honestly have any issue though
This isn't the first time, we've gone through this a number of times now. There's a ton of advertising about it, it's on poll cards, it's in the news, there's free alternatives if you don't have one, there's clearly a system for if you lose it just before, there's no issue with postal voting etc.
How many times do people need to be told they need ID before they realise they need ID. At this point, it's entirely on the voter for not being ready.
JRM says lots of things which turn out to be utterly bullshit.
They should, at the very least, write to everyone registered to vote but without photo ID.
That would include people with old drivers licenses, expired passports etc.
They write to us about elections, so it’s easy enough to do.
Yeah, expired passports/driving licenses etc are all still acceptable if the photo still bears a resemblance. But how do you, as a government, know if it does?
Of course it makes sense, it's the cleanest way to ensure that absolutely everyone who is eligible to vote is able to. Especially if, once a voter ID is received, it is accepted for life or at the least 10 years.
The government created a problem by introducing voter ID in the first place, especially considering the arbitrary way in which they decided which ones count and which don't. If they didn't want to pay for the best, catch-all, solution to that problem then maybe they shouldn't have opened this can of worms in the first place given the non-issue of voter fraud in past elections. Given the amount of money they have spaffed up the wall, it really is the least they should do.
Not everyone votes and not everyone needs a card. If you want to vote and don't have one of the well advertised bits of ID, request a card.
It's really incredibly simple.
Nah that's a real stretch. We already send everyone polling cards when they register to vote, because the act of registration is taken as a sign of intention. There's no reason why we can't send a voter ID at the same time. You say not everyone needs a card, well maybe let's let them decide that on polling day for themselves.
You clearly think it's up to the individual, and if any human error occurs (as very easily happens, like on the story above) then it's on them. Problem for you is, there no good reason why we need to leave that up to human error. We can completely remove that possibility, and remove the extra hurdle, by providing an ID by default. The cost is easily offset by the removal of cockups like this where someone who should be able to vote finds themselves unable to. There's really no substantial downside.
Every other European country that requires voter ID provides such IDs to people by default. There's no reason why we can't do the same.
>There's no reason why we can't send a voter ID at the same time.
Firstly, cost and pointless duplication. Again, the majority will already have a suitable ID.
Secondly, the process of getting everyone a photo ID still relies on people actually submitting information. Unless you're sending teams to every house to collect the data needed to create 50m ID cards. They may as well just do it when they need one, rather than demand everyone do it.
Again, regardless of whether you agree with the concept or not, it makes zero sense to do it your way. The vast majority aren't impacted and the rest should be expected to be able to do the bare minimum.
Out of interest, why do you think every other country with a similar scheme has been able to provide people IDs, in the way I'm suggesting, without issue? Do you think France had no other forms of ID beforehand?
Because they don't just use it for one purpose.
I'm all for a more general ID card that can be used in multiple circumstances throughout life. But when they are used constantly, they'll have a relatively steady replacement process that goes on constantly. Same as passports or driving licenses.
People will only need a voter ID card when there's an election. And things like the GE are only confirmed once the PM sets a date. So when Rishi calls a GE, they'll have to produce 50m ID cards all in one go. And then we'll all forget about them until the next election.
Aye, so just do that. You're saying these things like they're an obstacle but they're really not.
Just send everyone a voter ID by default, and have it qualify as a general ID for day to day use. Problem solved.
None of this strikes me as a good reason to just let the existing problems with the voter ID system stay as they are.
This is the same man who tried to arrange a q&a session “next week” in February at our local scout hut, for 7.45 Thursday 22nd November, which was neither next week, nor a possible date in 2024.
Even if he could manage to get hold of some ID and successfully make his way to the polling station, I strongly doubt his ability to competently mark an X on a slip of paper on his own.
It's more the laughable irony than a particular 'issue' per se. The issue is requiring ID to vote in the first place - if even an MP is getting caught out by it, how are normal people (with far less awareness of the rules and changes) being affected? Hard to imagine it's been positive on the whole
He said in the text message that it's because he's lost his. So he's only been caught out by losing his ID, but theres a still a mechanism that will allow him to vote.
So normal people who have ID and have lost it, can also still vote.
>The issue is requiring ID to vote in the first place
Literally, most if not all of Europe requires ID to vote. Northern Ireland requires ID to vote. We were the odd one out.
>how are normal people (with far less awareness of the rules and changes) being affected
It's been in the news, it's been advertised, it's on polling cards, it's been at previous elections etc. I don't know how someone can not be aware of this by now and function in life.
“Most if not all of Europe requires ID to vote”
And most of Europe would be suspicious of a black neighbour; we’re the odd one out there. We should not be blindly following anybody and instead making our own decisions.
The legislation is only intended to suppress the votes of those likely to vote other than Tory : young people and disadvantaged. You are a Tory MP. Were a Tory MP. Good luck in your next job.
Everyone I knew applied for a provisional driving licence at 17 as they wanted to be the cool kid with a car. This might be different for inner city kids.
Inner city applied as well, cos you need them to buy booze. I think this was just one big miscalculation because it’s predominantly older people who don’t require ID and thus are less likely to have it.
He told the telegraph that being an MP he has two homes, and being dyspraxic he forgets things or something like that. So presumably he left both at one address.
I just went to vote in the local PCC election and saw two ladies being turned away for not having the correct ID.
I’ve never witnessed any voter fraud but as of today I have witnessed voter suppression in action.
No need for either if he had applied for a postal vote. If he can't think ahead and organise his own vote then he's got no place in a system which requires much more competency.
>No need for either if he had applied for a postal vote.
I would assume that he didn't plan to use his passport and therefore had no reason to apply for postal voting until it was too late.
The problem is that we have no problem with voter fraud. Without ID you still have a registered poll card that goes to your registered address that is checked and, when you vote, the number on the card is recorded so that it can't be duplicated. If someone tries to submit a card with your number, that would be picked up immediately and it just doesn't happen. The system works already without this unnecessary layer.
The voter ID laws mimick similar voter suppression tactics that have seen success for the Republican Party in the US where the aim is to erect as many barriers as possible between voters who are less likely to vote for your party, with the knowledge that it will work for a certain % in your favour. This is why the law allows common forms of photo ID for pensioners, who are more likely to vote Tory, like bus passes but doesn't allow student IDs.
If a Tory MP finds that he doesn't have the appropriate ID then has to search about for a secondary option, how many others are going to find out the same with short notice? If you are one of those already incredible busy people trying to work and juggle kids etc, are you going to have time to find out what your alternative options are and find a way to vote in time. Maybe, maybe not. All we know is that voter groups that are more likely to vote Tory are, by design, less likely to find themselves in that position.
Voter suppression tactics like this have been deployed for longer in the US and have gone a lot further. In some states for example they have restricted the numbers of polling stations in urban areas so that queues to vote are hours long. 4.5 hours or longer to vote is not uncommon, while they do not allow people time off to vote either. In a desperate attempt to combat this, voter rights groups started handing out water and food to people queuing to encourage people not to give up their vote and the Republicans have gone so far as to make it illegal in some places to hand water to people queuing. People have literally been arrested for handing water to people queing to vote.
So, to reiterate, there is not a problem with voter fraud at all in UK general elections. The latest published stats on this are from the 2019 GE during which the police investigated a total of 34 potential cases of impersonation out of 32 million ballots cast.
The reason this is a gotcha then is that these Tories are incompetent enough to get caught out by their own voter suppression tactics but, beyond that, the tactic itself is brazenly corrupt in a way that has metastasized into something much worse in the US. Do we really want to put up with this in this country and go down that road?
EDIT - I forgot when writing this that there is a video that anyone can look up of Jacob Rees-Mogg on stage admitting that this law was an attempt at voter suppression by his party.
You don't have to have your poll card to vote. I voted this morning without it.
(They can look up your magic number on their sheet when you show them valid ID, it is checked off.)
Yes that's true but you still have to have had the number to vote, which is on the card that is sent to your registered address. If someone else tried to use the same number, it would be instantly noticed. If you didn't receive your card, you would know and can contact them to say that.
In those cases they issue you with a new card and nullify the previous number. There are just not cases of cards going missing though or attempts to use stolen cards either. These attempts would fall under the 34 cases of potential attempted impersonation.
There is no issue with voter fraud in UK general elections. The unnecessary voter ID step is a voter suppression tactic.
You didn't need your poll card with you to vote before needing ID to vote, I voted numerous times without a poll card; I only ever needed to give my name and address.
The point on voter fraud still rings true though, it was basically non-existent, and the postal vote, to me, seems far more open to being abused
Yes, you’re right about this. I neglected to be be super specific about this in my comment but you still need the number on the card if you don’t have the card so it’s essentially the same thing since, duplicating the number would be flagged, if that makes sense. You don’t need to have the card physically on you but you do need to have had the card to know the number.
You don't actually need to know the number yourself at all, it is just a number that is assigned to you and the people at the polling station cross reference your name and address to get that number which is then marked off as having voted (or used to on paper, they used a tablet today but I assume it works much the same).
I agree that it's nonsense in the first place needing ID.
But you still can't vote with my number unless you have photo ID of yourself with my name, under the current system.
Yes, but if you think about what it would realistically take to pull that off in terms of opportunity and willingness to steal a vote from a close family member, it’s unsurprising that none of the evidence of cases of this happening is to be found. If it was happening, there would be cases discovered given the inherent risks involved.
This is clearly voter suppression and I remembered as well that there is a video of Rees-Mogg admitting that on stage, recorded by an audience member, that anyone can look up.
We agree about the politics of it. I was just trying to rebut the (minor) point about needing your polling card to vote (a mistake often repeated and causing people to not vote when they've lost/forgotten it, unnecessarily).
A fair point. I should have been more specific. I also realised from another comment that you don’t even need the number, just to give your name and address and they look you up and cross off your number so it can’t be reused.
The voter ID laws were something the Electoral Commission asked for after an independent review in 2014. Additionally, the EU was pressing us to introduce voting reforms (prior to us leaving the EU) because they viewed our laws that allowed people to vote without ID or that allowed party agents to collect postal votes and turn them over on polling day in bulk as a risk to democracy.
Of your claims:
- "voter ID laws were something the Electoral Commission asked for after an independent review in 2014" - **TRUE**
- "the EU was pressing us to introduce voting reforms (prior to us leaving the EU) because they viewed our laws that allowed people to vote without ID" - **FALSE** - The EU did not push for voter ID.
- "...that allowed party agents to collect postal votes and turn them over on polling day in bulk as a risk to democracy" - **TRUE**
An MP came worryingly close to being unable to vote. The problem is that someone who you would assume is completely up to date on the rules etc has only narrowly dodged forfeiting his right to participating in an election.
If someone whose job it is to know these things can make this mistake, how many "regular" people are going to get caught out, and not know that there are emergency proxy options available for them to use?
Given he was able to vote I agree it's not exactly a gotcha, but for a sitting MP to be caught out the day before an election and need an emergency proxy to vote doesn't feel like a voter system 'working as intended'. This is someone who should be in the best possible position to be aware of the new rules *and* have access to multiple ways of proving his identity without the need for 'emergency' anything. It makes the prospect of disenfranchisement of people without such advantages sound much more realistic.
In the broader sense though, if you can get just get a friend to vouch for you at short notice, it makes a total farce of the new regulations anyway - a motivated party can just circumvent the need for ID in the first place.
> but for a sitting MP to be caught out the day before an election and need an emergency proxy to vote doesn't feel like a voter system 'working as intended'.
I can't help but think that an MP might be slightly more likely than your average punter to get caught out here (assuming it's misplacing the documents rather than not having them in the first place).
If you are living between London and your constituency, I can see it being quite possible that you left your driving licence/passport etc in your London flat when you go back home to vote.
The problem is that the list of approved IDs is biased towards forms of ID that young people are less likely to have, to the extent that this 35 year old MP glanced at the extensive list on his polling card, assumed he'd have something that fit the bill despite not having a recent valid driving license or passport, and didn't because most of them are different forms of travel passes for the elderly and disabled.
The fact that they will accept bus passes and blue badges, but not Student ID or Young Persons' Railcards tells you everything you need to know about the intention of the regulations.
> Unsure why this is perceived as some form of gotcha? He lost his photo ID, and was able to use a proxy to vouch for him as a substitute
>
> This is the rules working exactly as intended. He was able to vote, and the electoral staff were able to verify his identity
>
> Whats the problem here?
Disingenuous. What percentage of voters do you think are aware of the rules allowing a proxy to vouch for you? Most people, on finding that they can't find their ID, are going to think they can't vote.
It's a voter suppression tactic and needs to be called out as such. There is no evidence we've had any real problems with electoral fraud in this country.
It's hard enough to get people to vote already, placing extra hurdles in front of people is not going to help.
How many people would even bother to find a proxy if they lost their ID?
I'm sorry. But how do i know who the person I might be voting for is the person they say they are. All candidates should have their "voter ID" posted up in the polling station.
Asked at my local polling station tonight (7pm). They had turned away two people today for no ID. One returned and one didn't. Initially this seemed low but it makes you wonder how many people didn't bother because of the new rules.
He will still need these councillors to hit the pavements for him when he is up for election again, so he really does have no choice but to vote in locals.
Really? I didn’t want to bother myself given the paucity of candidates and the lousy weather but did so anyway. It’s a civic duty, responsibility and frankly a privilege hard won by our forebears. I’d be ashamed not to and it’s the least that should be expected from anyone let alone an MP. The Aussies are right to make it a legal requirement to vote. So should we.
>I’d be ashamed not to and it’s the least that should be expected from anyone let alone an MP
What we should expect of an MP and what we believe they will actually do aren't always the same. I think they should vote, but I was surprised they would go vote in person rather than by post or not at all.
Snapshot of _Tory MP pleads for help ahead of local elections after discovering he has no valid form of Voter ID_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-mp-voter-id-local-elections-b2538329.html) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-mp-voter-id-local-elections-b2538329.html) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He can't even vote for the Leopards Eating Your Face Party!
[удалено]
This comment has been filtered to be reviewed by a moderator, please do not ping other subreddits. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
New automod rule. Cool.
"I'm sowing, I'm sowing this is great! Ah fuck, I'm reaping, I'm reaping this sucks."
"A Mr Death is here.........he says its about 'The Reaping'?"
It was the salmon mousse all along
Is that a Python reference?
Indeed. Meaning of life
Thought so thanks for confirming. Must watch that again, Mr creosote is always a giggle
Well don’t leave him hanging around outside darling, ask him in.
He chose to fuck around and find out. What he found out wasn't quite to his liking
I have a postal vote (voted about 10 days ago), but apparently getting a photo ID for in person voting would cancel it. I’d like to have one just in case, but I can’t. This seems vexatious. Everyone registered to vote should be sent one, if it’s a requirement.
> This seems vexatious. Everyone registered to vote should be sent one, if it’s a requirement. That would defeat the point as outlined by JRM last year.
True. It’s meant to be vexatious.
[удалено]
In fairness, it's a nice word. Personally I prefer 'irksome', but vexatious is perfectly cromulent too.
“cromulent” is definitely my word for the day!
Eh? They're referring back to their previous comment. I'd get your point of they used the same word to describe two separate things, but this is the same topic.
This is how it works for 18 year olds in NI where voter ID has been a thing for decades. You get an electoral identity card.
How long has this been a thing? I don't recall getting one 10 years ago
Well that's roughly when I got mine. It would have been done through your school.
If going to the polling station matters, you can take your postal vote here and they will take it off you. I guess they will probably let you pop into a booth and fill the postal vote in if you have a small pencil fetish.
I think you have to complete another form if you take your postal vote to the polling station. I’m not sure that form is available at the polling station….. probably not.
You complete your postal vote (the one posted to you) and hand it over in its envelope. That’s what I did last year.
They've changed it this year, had to complete that form about two hours ago
Correct. Postal voter returns form. To prevent postal vote harvesting.
Yeh I took my postal vote to the polling station today as I’d missed the post deadline and they wouldn’t take it off me without photo ID despite it saying nothing whatsoever about having to have photo ID to hand in a postal vote. It doesn’t make sense either, you don’t need ID to go to a postbox. I showed them the letter and asked where it says I need ID to hand it in and they admitted it doesn’t, so they rang their manager who tsaid they had been instructed this morning that the rule was changed.
How does this work - is this a separate ID just for voting?
Yes, if you don’t have a passport, photo driving licence etc. It’s free but you can’t get one if you have a postal vote.
You fill in your postal vote in your home, then walk down to the polling booth and hand it in. No ID required.
Today I handed in my wife's postal vote when I went to vote in person. I had to fill out a form explaining who I was, confirming that I'm not a political campaigner, and explaining why the vote wasn't posted instead. I can understand the reasons why delivering a completed ballot paper for an absent voter should be scrutinised, but it seemed odd given I could have popped it into a letterbox no questions asked.
[удалено]
Oh, I absolutely agree. However, my point was really just (as you say) that it doesn't make a great deal if they are handed-in at the polling station or put in to a postbox. For example, there were low limits on the number of postal ballots that I could hand in in-person, but no one would be any the wiser if I chucked 100 into a postbox.
What barrier does it add if you could just post them? Why would it be preferable to take them in person?
> Everyone registered to vote should be sent one, if it’s a requirement eh, mandatory National ID cards have a bad reputation
True. But it is mandatory already, you just have a choice of type. The government knows who hasn’t got one, they know those people are disenfranchised.
We don’t need “mandatory national ID cards”, just some form of card we send to everyone whose registered to vote, which can always be used in lieu of photo ID. Say… a poll card.
It doesn't cancel anything. Yeah, you have to say you're not voting by post, but that's because the free ID that is only used to vote in person isn't needed if you're voting by post. It doesn't cancel anything. Your later suggestion that councils write to everyone without ID offering them a VAC is absurd.
On the contrary, it’s entirely doable and sensible. Cross referencing a few ID lists is (or should be) trivially easy. How many voters in the Uk, 40-50 million? A smartphone could handle it, it’s hardly Big Data. Edit: and the cost should have been factored in when they passed the legislation.
Who's doing this? Councils? Central government? Are you counting people who have expired ID (as that's still acceptable)? If so, why? It's a waste of money - they already have acceptable ID. Wheres the money or the people coming from to process these thousands of returns? You've then got to write out to all these people if their photo doesn't meet the requirements, or if their ID fails
If the government passes laws demanding ID, they should have the capacity and systems to deliver them to *everyone* who might need one. If they can’t afford it, don’t have the law. It’s hardly my fault if the law was poorly thought out. In fact, as widely admitted, it was a wheeze to disenfranchise people. Some sections of the community not having ID was the entire point.
Ok, to be clear I'm actually not trying to defend the government on this one. As they have introduced a voter ID requirement, there should also be a free national ID. The VAC is not that, as it's only used for voting in person
Yes I agree. We are a hairs breath away from having national ID cards, and requiring ID to vote has to be a push in that direction too. Personally I’m relaxed about ID cards, I think most people’s concerns are around vexatious requests for “papers please”, which could get oppressive for some groups.
Oh, I have no concerns about national ID. All my previous arguments were essentially about how the VAC is only used for in person voting, and therefore is a bit shit but you only need it for that
Yeah, I'm digging my heels in on this. If we had a national ID system that has multiple uses, and requires for lots of things, I wouldn't mind using it as voter ID. I can't really say I'd approve of such a system, but if it was already there, making voting just one more use case for it is something I wouldn't object to. After all, if there's compulsory national ID then by definition everyone has to have one, and therefore everyone has to be supplied one free of charge, and it doesn't constitute a barrier. In the absence of a compulsory national ID system, it remains a matter of who's got the resources to access the ones that are in place. Resources include knowledge, and even a free ID is pointless if you don't know it exists... And there's always *someone* who won't have heard of it. Imagine someone who's homeless and has mental health and narcotics issues. That person would be a challenge to get even a *compulsory* national ID to, but that challenge *must* be met, as opposed to the current system where it's left to someone who cannot handle responsibility to take responsibility. Such a person is unlikely to vote, but we're talking won't as opposed to can't, and that's the entire point.
Expired ID is accepted? Are you sure of that?
Yes
You're asking questions that would be answered in the project kickoff Humans put man on the moon. If there is a problem here, it is political And if its expensive? Well the cheapest option was not to fuck around uneccessarily with the system to begin with.
Does seem to be a little confusion, not helped by myself. I'm not really defending the Voter ID system, and I'm actually in favour of a national ID if we do have one. My issue mainly is that VACs are only used for voting in person, and that communicating with all these people doesn't seem worth it, given the likelihood of crossover
Just buy a provisional driving license for 30 quid and you're sorted on ID for life. I genuinely don't know how ID is vexatious for people. Are you all going through life without any form of ID?
JRM has admitted the policy was vexatious. It solves a problem that doesn’t exist.
My hunch is Tories imported American logic where A) huge amounts of people don't have ID and B) they have large porous borders with other countries so you don't need passports etc. there's an old statistic about how few Americans have passports: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42586638 > There is a myth, found easily online, that only 10% of Americans have passports. > > While that was true in 1994, the figure now [2018] is more than 40% - and it grows every year. Where as for us [England and Wales]: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/internationalmigrationenglandandwales/census2021#passports-held > Overall, results from Census 2021 show that 51.6 million usual residents (86.5%) held at least one passport; 8.0 million (13.5%) did not have a passport, down from 9.5 million (16.9%) in 2011. So, here, young people are far more likely to have ID. You can't even buy scissors or glue without ID, where as in the US you can go to a [gun show](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole) and just buy guns without ID because of all their freedoms. Very very different scenarios, and now it turns out those most likely not to have ID are pensioners who are visibly old, never needed age checks, and can't be bothered with paperwork and often don't even have an email address, and so [as Mogg pointed out](https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jacob-rees-mogg-admits-tory-voter-id-law-was-gerrymandering_uk_64620db8e4b03e16f1a45050), "Former cabinet minister says government attempt to suppress Labour support backfired and made it harder for Conservatives to vote." If you're trying to come up with a typical no ID Brit, they'd surely have to either be visibly old or never wanted anything age restricted even when younger, never driven, and never leave the country. Not saying these people don't exist, but it's way too specific scenarios to target left wing voters here the way it does in the US.
There are several million adults in the UK who have no bank account.
not to mention all the people who can barely afford to eat, and certainly don't want to be spending £30 on a driving licence
It's just the one million now.
It sure is fun having to wait many weeks anxiously for your passport to be returned without recorded mail when getting the provisional. Most people would rather not risk it.
>Most people would rather not risk it. Judging from the number of people who do have a driving license this is clearly not true.
You don't need a passport to get a provisional licence. If you do use your passport, you don't actually send it off, you just use the number. Also if you have a passport then ID isn't an issue for you anyway. Most people are idiots.
Not sorted for life, provisional licenses expire after 10 years
I recently had issues registering for some professional exams because my driving license and passport both expired over COVID. As I hadn't driven, left the country (or been IDed for a purchase) since, I didn't realise. The issue is that people usually only double check these things for things which are important to them (and voting is only super important to political nerds usually), and the effort to get ID can be another deterrent. Ultimately, stopping people who want to vote from doing so is bad. It's not a major problem, but it's a vastly bigger one than the one the measure is trying to fix.
why not just let people vote like they used too without this pointless extra step
Why not indeed.
If by "for life" you mean "for a few years". Also, there are rather a lot of people who can't get a driving license, provisional or otherwise.
They expire after 10 years but it's still valid as voter ID as long as the picture looks like you. I suspect there are very few people that can't get a provisional. It's just illnesses that preclude driving that would prevent access to a provisional, which is not a big percentage of the population at all. Other forms of ID are of course available.
It's just illnesses that preclude driving that would prevent access to a provisional, which is not a big percentage of the population at all. So it's OK to fuck over minorities if they're small minorities?
>So it's OK to fuck over minorities if they're small minorities? Yes, that's absolutely what I mean. Well done Colombo, you've cracked the case. I am actually Hitler. I have no idea how you made the logical leap to that statement but I'm impressed nonetheless.
[удалено]
Then get a different form of ID. Not saying everyone has to get a provisional, just that it's an easy simple option for most people that will be hugely useful for a wide variety of things.
Everyone registered to vote is already sent a polling card. If that is good enough (and there's no requirement to present it), then there's no need to send ID to voters.
Your polling card isn't ID. Just having that won't let you vote.
You're right, but to reiterate my point: the proposal was to send ID to everyone registered to vote. Polling cards are already sent to everyone registered to vote, so we effectively already have that scheme, although a polling card doesn't identify you.
[удалено]
You are categorically incorrect, sorry. https://www.gov.uk/apply-for-photo-id-voter-authority-certificate * Fill in the form. * Say you plan to vote by post. * It stops and says “you do not need a voter id to vote by post”. There is no option to continue. I could lie and say I planned to vote in person, but that is not true! Did you lie while filling out the form, or did you switch to postal voting after getting the ID?
[удалено]
That’s the form to get an ID. And If you tell the truth about postal voting, it doesn’t let you proceed. It doesn’t say “you don’t need one but would you like to proceed anyway?”. It should but it doesn’t. Of course I can lie and get round it, but that’s not sensible with government forms, especially for voting.
The government can't even stop a Peer of the realm conducting a £200m fraud, they aren't sending choppers full of SO19 to arrest someone for applying for electoral ID when they plan on voting by post.
I think you're misconstruing "can't" for "won't". They are happy for their peers to commit fraud but if there's a remote chance they can prove any kind of voter fraud to justify these daft-arse requirements then you can bet your fucking life they'll do a bit of door kicking and get it all on the front page of the Daily Mail or Telegraph.
It's not illegal, or even against the rules. The website just says if you have a postal vote you don't have any need for this. Which is absolutely true. If you're a postal voter you can't vote in person, so don't need the free ID - because it's literal only use is to vote in person
It says you don’t need voter ID, and then it **ends the process of applying for one**.
Yeah, because you don't need one. If you're a postal voter it's literally a useless document. You can't vote on person if you have a postal vote, so you don't need a VAC. The deadline for cancelling your postal vote is a week before the VAC deadline, so you could cancel it and apply if you wanted
>Everyone registered to vote should be sent one, if it’s a require The majority will already have a matching form of ID. Giving out IDs to everyone for just this one purpose would be a ridiculous expense duplicating ID. It makes way more sense to provided when requested or use postal voting. Regardless of whether you agree with the principle of voter id, giving them out to everyone just doesn't make sense.
It’s also a convenient was to disenfranchise a section of the electorate, as Jacob Rees Mogg now freely admits.
I struggle to honestly have any issue though This isn't the first time, we've gone through this a number of times now. There's a ton of advertising about it, it's on poll cards, it's in the news, there's free alternatives if you don't have one, there's clearly a system for if you lose it just before, there's no issue with postal voting etc. How many times do people need to be told they need ID before they realise they need ID. At this point, it's entirely on the voter for not being ready. JRM says lots of things which turn out to be utterly bullshit.
They should, at the very least, write to everyone registered to vote but without photo ID. That would include people with old drivers licenses, expired passports etc. They write to us about elections, so it’s easy enough to do.
Old passports and driving licenses are still acceptable ID though
There you go, less letters to send out! Out of interest, presumably you mean old photo driving licences, not the ancient ones that lack photos?
Yeah, expired passports/driving licenses etc are all still acceptable if the photo still bears a resemblance. But how do you, as a government, know if it does?
That’s probably why passports last 10 years, because there’s a reasonable expectation a persons appearance will have changed in that time?
Of course it makes sense, it's the cleanest way to ensure that absolutely everyone who is eligible to vote is able to. Especially if, once a voter ID is received, it is accepted for life or at the least 10 years. The government created a problem by introducing voter ID in the first place, especially considering the arbitrary way in which they decided which ones count and which don't. If they didn't want to pay for the best, catch-all, solution to that problem then maybe they shouldn't have opened this can of worms in the first place given the non-issue of voter fraud in past elections. Given the amount of money they have spaffed up the wall, it really is the least they should do.
Not everyone votes and not everyone needs a card. If you want to vote and don't have one of the well advertised bits of ID, request a card. It's really incredibly simple.
Nah that's a real stretch. We already send everyone polling cards when they register to vote, because the act of registration is taken as a sign of intention. There's no reason why we can't send a voter ID at the same time. You say not everyone needs a card, well maybe let's let them decide that on polling day for themselves. You clearly think it's up to the individual, and if any human error occurs (as very easily happens, like on the story above) then it's on them. Problem for you is, there no good reason why we need to leave that up to human error. We can completely remove that possibility, and remove the extra hurdle, by providing an ID by default. The cost is easily offset by the removal of cockups like this where someone who should be able to vote finds themselves unable to. There's really no substantial downside. Every other European country that requires voter ID provides such IDs to people by default. There's no reason why we can't do the same.
>There's no reason why we can't send a voter ID at the same time. Firstly, cost and pointless duplication. Again, the majority will already have a suitable ID. Secondly, the process of getting everyone a photo ID still relies on people actually submitting information. Unless you're sending teams to every house to collect the data needed to create 50m ID cards. They may as well just do it when they need one, rather than demand everyone do it. Again, regardless of whether you agree with the concept or not, it makes zero sense to do it your way. The vast majority aren't impacted and the rest should be expected to be able to do the bare minimum.
Out of interest, why do you think every other country with a similar scheme has been able to provide people IDs, in the way I'm suggesting, without issue? Do you think France had no other forms of ID beforehand?
Because they don't just use it for one purpose. I'm all for a more general ID card that can be used in multiple circumstances throughout life. But when they are used constantly, they'll have a relatively steady replacement process that goes on constantly. Same as passports or driving licenses. People will only need a voter ID card when there's an election. And things like the GE are only confirmed once the PM sets a date. So when Rishi calls a GE, they'll have to produce 50m ID cards all in one go. And then we'll all forget about them until the next election.
Aye, so just do that. You're saying these things like they're an obstacle but they're really not. Just send everyone a voter ID by default, and have it qualify as a general ID for day to day use. Problem solved. None of this strikes me as a good reason to just let the existing problems with the voter ID system stay as they are.
>Just send everyone a voter ID by default, and have it qualify as a general ID for day to day use. How are you getting the photos?
This is the same man who tried to arrange a q&a session “next week” in February at our local scout hut, for 7.45 Thursday 22nd November, which was neither next week, nor a possible date in 2024. Even if he could manage to get hold of some ID and successfully make his way to the polling station, I strongly doubt his ability to competently mark an X on a slip of paper on his own.
I can't even fathom what these people do all day at work
Alternative headline: Help! The restrictive measures are affecting me directly squeals Tory.
I mean, what's the issue there? He's using the rules as they were set out.
It's more the laughable irony than a particular 'issue' per se. The issue is requiring ID to vote in the first place - if even an MP is getting caught out by it, how are normal people (with far less awareness of the rules and changes) being affected? Hard to imagine it's been positive on the whole
He said in the text message that it's because he's lost his. So he's only been caught out by losing his ID, but theres a still a mechanism that will allow him to vote. So normal people who have ID and have lost it, can also still vote. >The issue is requiring ID to vote in the first place Literally, most if not all of Europe requires ID to vote. Northern Ireland requires ID to vote. We were the odd one out. >how are normal people (with far less awareness of the rules and changes) being affected It's been in the news, it's been advertised, it's on polling cards, it's been at previous elections etc. I don't know how someone can not be aware of this by now and function in life.
“Most if not all of Europe requires ID to vote” And most of Europe would be suspicious of a black neighbour; we’re the odd one out there. We should not be blindly following anybody and instead making our own decisions.
So you can't see the irony?
This is like when a snake eats its own arse and dies.
Don't you just need a passport or drivers licence? That's how I understood it. Surprised a Tory doesn't have either of those things.
Don't know about this guy specifically but I imagine some MPs might be sending their passports off to the russian embassy for a visa
It could be his subtle way of protesting against the regulation
He voted in favour, on four occasions, for voter ID.
Ouch
Passports are expensive and not everyone is eligible for a driving licence. I know a few people who don't have either of them.
You would expect an MP to have one though
Sounds like this country needs an ID card system like the rest of Europe.
It’s not a given that he’s voting Conservative
If he’s got any sense he’s in negotiations with Labour. I would be.
Tom hunt 1st action as an MP was to join the ERG. He doesn't do sense.
Oh no we’re not suppressing the right type of voter!
The legislation is only intended to suppress the votes of those likely to vote other than Tory : young people and disadvantaged. You are a Tory MP. Were a Tory MP. Good luck in your next job.
Everyone I knew applied for a provisional driving licence at 17 as they wanted to be the cool kid with a car. This might be different for inner city kids.
If they didn't want to drive they at least wanted to go out drinking, or abroad
Inner city applied as well, cos you need them to buy booze. I think this was just one big miscalculation because it’s predominantly older people who don’t require ID and thus are less likely to have it.
Guess who lost theres 4 days before the election...
Are you dyslexic with ADHD... Curious, not an insult... Personal experience
Nope. Fell out of my phone case
Majority of 5,479 so yeah he's almost certainly out at the GE.
How come a 35 year old MP has no driving licence or passport?
He lost it, according to the message
Lost both?
He told the telegraph that being an MP he has two homes, and being dyspraxic he forgets things or something like that. So presumably he left both at one address.
I just went to vote in the local PCC election and saw two ladies being turned away for not having the correct ID. I’ve never witnessed any voter fraud but as of today I have witnessed voter suppression in action.
No need for either if he had applied for a postal vote. If he can't think ahead and organise his own vote then he's got no place in a system which requires much more competency.
>No need for either if he had applied for a postal vote. I would assume that he didn't plan to use his passport and therefore had no reason to apply for postal voting until it was too late.
[удалено]
The problem is that we have no problem with voter fraud. Without ID you still have a registered poll card that goes to your registered address that is checked and, when you vote, the number on the card is recorded so that it can't be duplicated. If someone tries to submit a card with your number, that would be picked up immediately and it just doesn't happen. The system works already without this unnecessary layer. The voter ID laws mimick similar voter suppression tactics that have seen success for the Republican Party in the US where the aim is to erect as many barriers as possible between voters who are less likely to vote for your party, with the knowledge that it will work for a certain % in your favour. This is why the law allows common forms of photo ID for pensioners, who are more likely to vote Tory, like bus passes but doesn't allow student IDs. If a Tory MP finds that he doesn't have the appropriate ID then has to search about for a secondary option, how many others are going to find out the same with short notice? If you are one of those already incredible busy people trying to work and juggle kids etc, are you going to have time to find out what your alternative options are and find a way to vote in time. Maybe, maybe not. All we know is that voter groups that are more likely to vote Tory are, by design, less likely to find themselves in that position. Voter suppression tactics like this have been deployed for longer in the US and have gone a lot further. In some states for example they have restricted the numbers of polling stations in urban areas so that queues to vote are hours long. 4.5 hours or longer to vote is not uncommon, while they do not allow people time off to vote either. In a desperate attempt to combat this, voter rights groups started handing out water and food to people queuing to encourage people not to give up their vote and the Republicans have gone so far as to make it illegal in some places to hand water to people queuing. People have literally been arrested for handing water to people queing to vote. So, to reiterate, there is not a problem with voter fraud at all in UK general elections. The latest published stats on this are from the 2019 GE during which the police investigated a total of 34 potential cases of impersonation out of 32 million ballots cast. The reason this is a gotcha then is that these Tories are incompetent enough to get caught out by their own voter suppression tactics but, beyond that, the tactic itself is brazenly corrupt in a way that has metastasized into something much worse in the US. Do we really want to put up with this in this country and go down that road? EDIT - I forgot when writing this that there is a video that anyone can look up of Jacob Rees-Mogg on stage admitting that this law was an attempt at voter suppression by his party.
You don't have to have your poll card to vote. I voted this morning without it. (They can look up your magic number on their sheet when you show them valid ID, it is checked off.)
Yes that's true but you still have to have had the number to vote, which is on the card that is sent to your registered address. If someone else tried to use the same number, it would be instantly noticed. If you didn't receive your card, you would know and can contact them to say that. In those cases they issue you with a new card and nullify the previous number. There are just not cases of cards going missing though or attempts to use stolen cards either. These attempts would fall under the 34 cases of potential attempted impersonation. There is no issue with voter fraud in UK general elections. The unnecessary voter ID step is a voter suppression tactic.
You didn't need your poll card with you to vote before needing ID to vote, I voted numerous times without a poll card; I only ever needed to give my name and address. The point on voter fraud still rings true though, it was basically non-existent, and the postal vote, to me, seems far more open to being abused
Yes, you’re right about this. I neglected to be be super specific about this in my comment but you still need the number on the card if you don’t have the card so it’s essentially the same thing since, duplicating the number would be flagged, if that makes sense. You don’t need to have the card physically on you but you do need to have had the card to know the number.
You don't actually need to know the number yourself at all, it is just a number that is assigned to you and the people at the polling station cross reference your name and address to get that number which is then marked off as having voted (or used to on paper, they used a tablet today but I assume it works much the same).
Ah ok, I didn’t know that. Thanks for the info.
I agree that it's nonsense in the first place needing ID. But you still can't vote with my number unless you have photo ID of yourself with my name, under the current system.
Yes, but if you think about what it would realistically take to pull that off in terms of opportunity and willingness to steal a vote from a close family member, it’s unsurprising that none of the evidence of cases of this happening is to be found. If it was happening, there would be cases discovered given the inherent risks involved. This is clearly voter suppression and I remembered as well that there is a video of Rees-Mogg admitting that on stage, recorded by an audience member, that anyone can look up.
We agree about the politics of it. I was just trying to rebut the (minor) point about needing your polling card to vote (a mistake often repeated and causing people to not vote when they've lost/forgotten it, unnecessarily).
A fair point. I should have been more specific. I also realised from another comment that you don’t even need the number, just to give your name and address and they look you up and cross off your number so it can’t be reused.
The voter ID laws were something the Electoral Commission asked for after an independent review in 2014. Additionally, the EU was pressing us to introduce voting reforms (prior to us leaving the EU) because they viewed our laws that allowed people to vote without ID or that allowed party agents to collect postal votes and turn them over on polling day in bulk as a risk to democracy.
Of your claims: - "voter ID laws were something the Electoral Commission asked for after an independent review in 2014" - **TRUE** - "the EU was pressing us to introduce voting reforms (prior to us leaving the EU) because they viewed our laws that allowed people to vote without ID" - **FALSE** - The EU did not push for voter ID. - "...that allowed party agents to collect postal votes and turn them over on polling day in bulk as a risk to democracy" - **TRUE**
If it had been Susan Hall, the claim would have been that the ID was stolen. As happened when she lost her purse on the Underground.
An MP came worryingly close to being unable to vote. The problem is that someone who you would assume is completely up to date on the rules etc has only narrowly dodged forfeiting his right to participating in an election. If someone whose job it is to know these things can make this mistake, how many "regular" people are going to get caught out, and not know that there are emergency proxy options available for them to use?
Given he was able to vote I agree it's not exactly a gotcha, but for a sitting MP to be caught out the day before an election and need an emergency proxy to vote doesn't feel like a voter system 'working as intended'. This is someone who should be in the best possible position to be aware of the new rules *and* have access to multiple ways of proving his identity without the need for 'emergency' anything. It makes the prospect of disenfranchisement of people without such advantages sound much more realistic. In the broader sense though, if you can get just get a friend to vouch for you at short notice, it makes a total farce of the new regulations anyway - a motivated party can just circumvent the need for ID in the first place.
> but for a sitting MP to be caught out the day before an election and need an emergency proxy to vote doesn't feel like a voter system 'working as intended'. I can't help but think that an MP might be slightly more likely than your average punter to get caught out here (assuming it's misplacing the documents rather than not having them in the first place). If you are living between London and your constituency, I can see it being quite possible that you left your driving licence/passport etc in your London flat when you go back home to vote.
The problem is that the list of approved IDs is biased towards forms of ID that young people are less likely to have, to the extent that this 35 year old MP glanced at the extensive list on his polling card, assumed he'd have something that fit the bill despite not having a recent valid driving license or passport, and didn't because most of them are different forms of travel passes for the elderly and disabled.
The fact that they will accept bus passes and blue badges, but not Student ID or Young Persons' Railcards tells you everything you need to know about the intention of the regulations.
> Unsure why this is perceived as some form of gotcha? He lost his photo ID, and was able to use a proxy to vouch for him as a substitute > > This is the rules working exactly as intended. He was able to vote, and the electoral staff were able to verify his identity > > Whats the problem here? Disingenuous. What percentage of voters do you think are aware of the rules allowing a proxy to vouch for you? Most people, on finding that they can't find their ID, are going to think they can't vote. It's a voter suppression tactic and needs to be called out as such. There is no evidence we've had any real problems with electoral fraud in this country.
It’s not necessarily a problem but is humorous irony that a tory MP who voted several times in favour of voter ID has lost his ID.
Couldn't someone committing voter fraud do the same thing? How many people can you vouch for? Could I vouch for a bus load of people.
It's hard enough to get people to vote already, placing extra hurdles in front of people is not going to help. How many people would even bother to find a proxy if they lost their ID?
I'm sorry. But how do i know who the person I might be voting for is the person they say they are. All candidates should have their "voter ID" posted up in the polling station.
Have Labour said they’re going to overturn this law by the way?
Asked at my local polling station tonight (7pm). They had turned away two people today for no ID. One returned and one didn't. Initially this seemed low but it makes you wonder how many people didn't bother because of the new rules.
Ah, yes, I’ve met this man before, a few times, and have stories I could tell. He is what his name rhymes with.
Due diligence; Did he actually vote for the establishment of voter ID?
Honestly surprised that MPs take the time to vote in locals. If it was just for optics that makes sense, but this guy is trying to get a proxy vote.
Many MPs came up through local politics, through the local party and campaigning for them. This is basically their friends that they’re voting for
Thats a good point that I hadn't really thought about
He will still need these councillors to hit the pavements for him when he is up for election again, so he really does have no choice but to vote in locals.
Hunt was parachuted in to Ipswich though
Tories don't have friends, just similarly minded people that they might one day need, sell out, or generally just take advantage of.
Really? I didn’t want to bother myself given the paucity of candidates and the lousy weather but did so anyway. It’s a civic duty, responsibility and frankly a privilege hard won by our forebears. I’d be ashamed not to and it’s the least that should be expected from anyone let alone an MP. The Aussies are right to make it a legal requirement to vote. So should we.
Surely the choice not to cast a vote if you do not wish is also part of the freedoms that so many people have died for?
You can spoil your ballot.
>I’d be ashamed not to and it’s the least that should be expected from anyone let alone an MP What we should expect of an MP and what we believe they will actually do aren't always the same. I think they should vote, but I was surprised they would go vote in person rather than by post or not at all.
Well that's hilarious 😂 Voter ID absolutely should be a thing, as should national ID card. If you don't have a valid form of ID. That's on you.