Photographic ID needed for next GE

I read it too and the writers are obviously being very circumspect. Nevertheless, if people have reported suspicions of electoral fraud, they do have a duty to investigate it. Very few convictions doesn't provide proof that it isn't happening. The fact that fraud is mainly reported in communities with a high percentage of ethnic minority voters possibly means that they're being cautious.

The UK does seem to be out of line with other countries, including part of the UK (Northern Ireland) itself.

From a practical point of view, how many people don't have photo ID or couldn't obtain it quite easily? Presumably, passport holders, drivers, bus pass and blue badge holders and those under 25 with Proof of Age ID already have it. It wouldn't be that difficult for councils to issue cards to those who fall through the net.

I'm not sure how postal voting is becoming more secure or how it can be checked that people aren't voting at home under duress.

Right, I have read it MOnica.

Firstly, their 'research' is so poor that I doubt that any academic journal would accept it.

Secondly, I am not at all convinced by their rationale:

This part of the system could become more vulnerable to fraud as other processes (including electoral registration and postal or proxy voting) become more secure

They produce no evidence for this conclusion and subsequent EC data doesn't support it.

Maizie perhaps you should read the ERS report

But Maizie there is evidence of fraud and in the present heightened level of political conflict and with the possibility that in the next election, there will be more marginal constituencies with small majorities for the winner, it is better to address the problem while it is small so that voter fraud does not become an issue.

But there isn't evidence of the sort of fraud that ID would supposedly prevent. I don't feel inclined to be happy about a measure thought up to appease the hysterical who read too many conspiracy theories.. It doesn't even feel rational to me.

Has anyone even looked at the EC link that I posted?

There is suspicion of fraud. If there were evidence more people would be prosecuted. Even the rumours and suspicions are limited to a very few constituencies. This is a sledgehammer to crack a nut. And is just, as this conservative government so often does, appealing to the lowest common denominator.

But Maizie there is evidence of fraud and in the present heightened level of political conflict and with the possibility that in the next election, there will be more marginal constituencies with small majorities for the winner, it is better to address the problem while it is small so that voter fraud does not become an issue.

However the main fraud problem is with postal voting and the Electoral Reform Society wrote a major report on problems with both kinds of electoral fraud in 2014 and their recommendations are practical and tested www.electoralcommission.org.uk/sites/default/files/pdf_file/Electoral-fraud-review-final-report.pdf

I think it would be expensive to introduce (and still see no valid reason for it) as ID would have to be free. I have no objection to ID cards, though. Maybe we should have compulsory voting. We have a duty to be educated and pay taxes, so why no duty to vote?

I'm "nodding along with it" because, if done properly, I don't see it as a big deal. It will shut up a few moaners, which is a good thing, but at what cost? Am I right in thinking bus passes and blue badge permits have photo ID?

I seriously think there needs to be a big PR exercise to get people to vote at all. Especially in local elections, there is potential for fraud. Not only that, but it tends to be the same cliques who are voted in - fraud or no fraud.

Too many people don't bother to vote because they think their vote won't make any difference. They then moan that decisions are made by some kind of distant elite, whom they could have voted against but didn't.

With that level of apathy, it's easy for some charismatic somebody to come along and blame immigrants, Muslims, the EU, single parents, benefit scroungers, health and safety regs (delete and replace as appropriate) and promise a few goodies, especially if they hold a glass of beer in one hand and a cigarette in the other and pretend to be concerned about the "common people". (UKIP/Brexit Party, I'm looking at you.)

But voter ID still has no purpose if there isn't any fraud for it to prevent.

I don't understand why most of you are nodding along with it.

Younger people are also likely already to have a Proof of Age card, so they can buy alcohol and tobacco and see 18 films. I can't remember when the scheme was introduced, but it must have been about 20 years ago.

Thank you for that MOnica. I knew I'd read about it somewhere. There really are few "categories" in UK politics these days. It really isn't a case of the poorest voting Labour. One of the most consistent tendencies is age. Older people tend to vote Conservative or Brexit Party. Older people are also likely to have had fewer educational opportunities, so they tend to have fewer educational qualifications.

The Labour Party is a very "broad church", which is probably why there is so much tension between various factions.

MaizieD - I would have thought that no passport and only a paper driving license equals older Brexit supporters. Young people are more inclined to travel widely, have photo ID and generally support remaining.

Have a look at this LondonGranny yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/04/25/demographics-dividing-britain It is a lot more complicated than your summary.

Nearly as many people in the lower sociodemographic groups vote Conservative as in the higher groups and if you add the Brexit party vote to the Conservative vote. Most conservative voters are in the lower demographic groups.

We don't know who will be likely to be disenfranchised, but the people who are being disenfranchised should not be. We are supposed to have universal sufferage.

It is lies

There is no widespread electoral fraud.

It will simply have the effect of disenfranchising whole swathes of the voting public.

It's elderly people in wealthier areas of England that are more likely to vote Conservative. It definitely doesn't apply to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland except where there are large enclaves of wealthier English retirees.

I'm not so sure about removing people likely to vote against them. One of the objections is that elderly people might not have any form of photo ID. But aren't the elderly, statistically more likely to vote tory? And there are rather a lot of them...

Just a thought...

The brexit plotters did very well when they disenfranchised all the EU citizens who live in this country, worked in this country and paid taxes in this country (unlike the owners of most of the right-wing press) from voting in the fraudulent referendum of 2016 which affected them more than anyone else.

So they think that they can get away with removing from the electorate a few million more folk who are likely to vote against them.

Very difficult to put into practice at short notice, I’m thinking of Windrushers and anyone that doesn’t drive or go abroad, to work well an ID card system would be needed.

According to the article I read today, this proposal won't take effect before the next scheduled General Election in 2022. If they can unscramble all the possible drawbacks, I'll be very surprised.

The problem is that photo ID is beyond the financial reach of many.

I agree that it's the postal votes which are more open to abuse.

But I don't see a problem with taking ID to vote.

Postal votes are surely far more open to manipulation/fraud than in-person voting - I presume that there is absolutely nothing to prevent a controlling partner (or even someone from outside the home in some cases) from ensuring that the person(s) under their control vote (s) a particular way?

I am not sure how this can be addressed, and certainly don't see how photo ID can be used to prevent it.

Even if you believe that ID cards are a good idea, when it comes to the chance of disenfranchising possibly thousands of people balanced against one case of impersonation in the last election this can surely not be a justifiably reason to undertake this move towards it.

Students can register to vote at home and at university. What's to stop them voting twice? Does anyone know if this happens?