Windrush Generation

Joel this article is not mainly about voter fraud but electoral fraud/abuse. The Guardian article puts the voter fraud statistic in context - 21 cases in 2014, 44 cases in 2016 and then 28 cases in 2017 - funnily enough the Cabinet Office ‘failed’ to mention the 2017 figure - but who wants facts to get in the way of a good story. I’m not denying that there are not a range of electoral law abuses but voter fraud is not a real issue. So what is the real agenda?

Thanks for that, Joelsnan

joelsnan
Have you picked up the baton Re the blue links

As regards producing ID I haven't had a utiliy bill for ages- all done on-line, something the utility companies are promoting.

Petra No way , I did try to direct posters to research themselves however was challenged so reluctantly had to do a few 'blue links'

Your blue links did not support your argument though joelsnan.

Perhaps you could find the evidence that you claimed proved that personation (or voter impersonation) is a big problem. 28 cases out of an electorate of 47 million is infinitesimal.

I did research this through Hansard some years ago, and there must be recent cause for concern that some communities are importing their 'Ida's' of democracy in voting into the UK system or why, when the system has worked for centuries is the ID before vote being trialled.
Didn't we have to dip our fingers in ink at one time to stop us going in again?

Not sure what you mean joelnan.

28 cases from 47 million electorate? A cause for concern. Really?

Joel there simply is not the evidence about voter fraud as opposed to some other types of electoral fraud. And I find your post a rather obvious dog whistle. As I said upthread - the Tories have a very very murky history about election expenses and donations ( for the latter other parties are not innocent but not so bad). I suppose I could say they are importing their idea of democracy into our system? You are wrong about the voter fraud and you cannot provide any evidence at all - the Guardian link made it clear that the UKSA condemned the use of the governments main arguments in favour of trialling voter ID because of their misleading use of statistics. You know the UKSA who bring their very odd cultural ideas about the proper use of statistical information by governments. What a very very odd cultural belief.

Well here’s a fact - nearly 4000 people turned away from the 5 pilot areas. What a wonderful country we are - we take away one of the most fundamental and important aspects of citizenship not because people are not entitled to vote but because they haven’t brought their utility bill or whatever - there must be a legal challenge in this somewhere. I could weep for what this country is becoming

But never mind - perhaps they were all black and/or poor so didn’t really deserve the vote in the first place What with their ‘different cultures’ and all that

4000 people! That’s shocking. And it will have deterred many others entitled to vote who didn’t have the time to hunt out documents.

It’s quite ridiculous. I hope this trial isn’t adopted into policy. Free ID cards is the only way this could work fairly.

Ah but ah but - what hoops would you have to go through to get the free ID card? Oh wait a minute.....But the real question is why? What’s the actual problem?

It seems a bit confused doesn't it firstly to complain that people don't use their vote and at the same time introduce restrictions so that fewer people are able to vote. But as you say they probably aren't the right sort of people anyway! In the year we celebrate 100 years since some women and many working class men won the right to vote universal suffrage is once again under threat.

You know trisher the more I think about this, the more amazed I am. People legally allowed to vote told they couldn’t and they just went away. Maybe they are putting something in the water ....

What system has worked for centuries, Joelsnan?

The secret ballot was introduced in 1872 and there has only been universal equal adult suffrage in the UK since the late 1920s (the age at which women could vote was 30, as opposed to men's 21, until then)

The system that worked for centuries Maizie is the one we are heading back to - the vote only for rich, powerful white males. Well it worked beautifully for them. The cuts in legal aid have turned access to justice in many cases into the preserve of the wealthy and the Government has got away with that so why not go after the ridiculous concept of universal franchise?

Apologies, senior moment....decades.
The introduction of ID checks cannot be blamed on elitist, rich powerful white males et. al, this is a cross party initiative and would not have been considered unless there was a concern. Additionally many other countries require ID, are we too elitist to require the same?

It is also a nice neat distraction from other sorts of electoral fraud. Pretend that there is something wrong, convince people about that in the face of very little evidence and then introduce restrictions which stop poor people voting. It's all a bit 1984 isn't it.

Well said trisher . Please note Joel unlike many other countries we don’t have national ID cards - whether we should or not is a different matter. I still want the evidence that voter ID is necessary. Just because something is a cross party iniative doesn’t make it valid or right.

this is a cross party initiative and would not have been considered unless there was a concern.

It's a nice dogwhistle vote getter for people who don't believe in experts or democracy.

Additionally many other countries require ID,

Frankly, I don't give a stuff what 'other countries do'. It's not an argument in favour

MaizieD
I don't give a stuff either!

So why did you mention it along with a critical comment about our perhaps being too elitist? We should sort out our own problems in our own context and we don’t have any evidence that we have one re voter fraud so we should leave it - unless of course there’s another agenda? Surely not?

It's no wonder May didn't want any Home Office correspondence released.

Arten Llazari, the RMC’s chief executive, said: “The Capita 2012 contract effectively outsourced part of the creation of the hostile environment to the private sector. In the process many vulnerable citizens, mostly of Caribbean descent, were harassed and repeatedly threatened with deportation.

“Charities and concerned MPs have been highlighting what is now known as the Windrush scandal to the Home Office since at least 2013 to no avail.”

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/may/08/home-office-told-of-windrush-errors-five-years-ago-experts-say?CMP=share_btn_link