So you thought voter ID was straightforward?

I’ve no objection to ID cards. In fact they seem rather old fashioned in out technological age of AI.
What would concern me would be universal surveillance of general public by CCTV using facial/eye recognition.
I see someone has already ready suggested a national DNA data base. Another step down the slippery slope imo.

growstuff

Baggs Are you against ID cards generally or ID for voting or both? They're separate issues.

No. I'm just puzzled by the againstery (cries of "It's a Scam!") on this thread given that several European countries have them already and no-one seems to mind.

I think Tony Blair and numerous other politicians, including Sunak, are WEF robots though. That worries me. Separate issues, as you say, but also related.

I don't think citizens going about their legal business should have to justify themselves to their government except in a few circumstances such as are already covered (opening a bank account, becoming a leader in a youth organisation, etc). And I don't think having to prove you are a citizen of a country in order to vote there is excessive.

Thank you for helping me to clarify my thoughts on this.

And I don't think having to prove you are a citizen of a country in order to vote there is excessive

I agree, but previous security conditions such as being on the electoral list in front of the election clerk, and maybe having the voting card sent to you as well, even with both of these, you won't be able to vote without having photo ID.

So, if like me, you take the dog for a walk and decide to pop into vote while you are there, you had better have photo ID in your pocket, not just dog poo bags .

HousePlantQueen

^And I don't think having to prove you are a citizen of a country in order to vote there is excessive^

I agree, but previous security conditions such as being on the electoral list in front of the election clerk, and maybe having the voting card sent to you as well, even with both of these, you won't be able to vote without having photo ID.

So, if like me, you take the dog for a walk and decide to pop into vote while you are there, you had better have photo ID in your pocket, not just dog poo bags .

Yep. Guess so. We've been spoiled with it being too easy up till now perhaps?

Have to remember the demography of the UK is changing at quite a rate. I think that makes a difference and may be what's pushing this 'agenda'.

A question though: is it actually happening?

Or are people just freaking out at the possibility?

Universal IDs - yes

Minority IDs - no

Baggs

HousePlantQueen

And I don't think having to prove you are a citizen of a country in order to vote there is excessive

I agree, but previous security conditions such as being on the electoral list in front of the election clerk, and maybe having the voting card sent to you as well, even with both of these, you won't be able to vote without having photo ID.

So, if like me, you take the dog for a walk and decide to pop into vote while you are there, you had better have photo ID in your pocket, not just dog poo bags .

Yep. Guess so. We've been spoiled with it being too easy up till now perhaps?

It should never be too easy to vote, our system has served us very, very well and there is absolutely no reason for these minority IDs.

Whitewavemark2

Universal IDs - yes

Minority IDs - no

Agreed. I was assuming that if someone didn't have common ID already (driving licence, passport, bus pass, etc) they would need to get some and that a "voting pass" was one option, just so you can prove you are on the electoral register.

I'm also assuming most adults have some kind of photographic ID already because it's needed for various other things. So any 'minority' covers anyone who hasn't. Which, until very recently, included one of my daughters. She got a provisional driving licence (she doesn't drive and didn't have a passport either) when she needed photographic ID for a job application.

Whitewavemark2

growstuff

Oreo

Am sure that all the hoohah around the thought of an ID card is just that we haven’t had them in this country before now.
Other countries is Europe seem to manage them well enough and people accept them and find them useful.

One example of departments "talking" to each other is that DVLA can take your passport photo for a new driving licence. If DVLA can do it, there's no reason why every government department couldn't be given access.

There is no reason, that has always been the case though. But the point is it doesn’t or certainly didn’t until this current government.

However, there is no evidence that it is doing it now, certainly talking to working civil servants.

My daughter is a working civil servant - it's from conversations with her that I know that departments do talk to each other, although it is obviously only certain people who are given access.

I can't remember when Government Gateway was set up - before or since this government? Even at a simple level, government accounts for the consumer are linked.

Yes your daughter is correct, but there is nothing to suggest that it has changed since my working days or that it is more widespread than previously.

So as an example I was able to access bank accounts, utility companies for addresses, property etc, however, it was only ever done for reasons that would almost certainly end in a criminal conviction for fraud, tax evasion, and so forth. It was never done as a matter of course on a day to day level.

HousePlantQueen

vegansrock

A national database / ID system does help solve some of the problems of “ illegal” migration. I would imagine some of those “libertarians” might approve of that.

Quite possibly, but then we get into the scenario of only 'slightly foreign looking people' being asked for ID, young men of Middle Eastern appearance being stopped, and stopped by who? There is potential for abuse, and potential for misinterpretation of requests for ID.

But there's some evidence that people with dark skin are already apprehended by the police more often than others. Having easily accessible ID would make no difference to how often they're stopped - in fact, it might be easier for them to prove who they are. The police are supposed to have a good reason for stopping somebody. It's not having an ID which would make the difference, but changing the law so that the police are given random stop and search powers.

Whitewavemark2

Yes your daughter is correct, but there is nothing to suggest that it has changed since my working days or that it is more widespread than previously.

So as an example I was able to access bank accounts, utility companies for addresses, property etc, however, it was only ever done for reasons that would almost certainly end in a criminal conviction for fraud, tax evasion, and so forth. It was never done as a matter of course on a day to day level.

Well, it must have changed if you think that government departments can't communicate with each other about individuals because they most certainly can.

If you were being targeted for surveillance, information to build up a detailed profile about you could be available in a very short time.

Whitewavemark2

Yes your daughter is correct, but there is nothing to suggest that it has changed since my working days or that it is more widespread than previously.

So as an example I was able to access bank accounts, utility companies for addresses, property etc, however, it was only ever done for reasons that would almost certainly end in a criminal conviction for fraud, tax evasion, and so forth. It was never done as a matter of course on a day to day level.

Why would having an ID card with information about a person's NI number linked to a photo change that? Bank accounts and utility company bills aren't government information anyway.

No I’m not saying that I didn’t “talk” to other government departments, but what I am saying is that it is not - as has been suggested- done as a matter of course. There are strict rules and guidelines in place and the bar is set pretty high, the onus being on the officer to show why it is necessary and the possible outcomes. Always because of potential criminal conviction. Fishing exercises are strictly not allowed.

I don't see why "fishing" exercises would be allowed, if everybody carried ID. I don't really see how they would enable them either. It would just be like having a passport which didn't allow for going abroad.

The Voter Authority Certificates, which people without photo ID can apply for, rely on people having a National Insurance number. We're all issued with one when we turn 16. The government already has the records it needs to issue one - it's just a question of adding a photo.

It certainly is a Tory scam. The reason given for introducing voter ID was stated to be voter fraud. The fact is that voter fraud is trivial. Most election fraud is perpetrated by a few candidate bad apples who should be weeded out by their Parties. The object is to reduce voting by the poor, students and others who have much to gain by voting against the Tories.

Students are able to vote twice along with anyone else who has two homes. Obviously they should not, but it is easy to do. Register once in the university town and again in their home town. A person with two homes can do exactly the same.

Another desperate ploy by the Tories to reduce the Labour/Liberal vote. It used to said that the Tories hoped there was going to a lot of rain on election days as they believed that only the staunch Tories would bother to vote. This is the same idea. Hope non Tories will not be bothered to sort a correct photo ID. However, the determination to get rid of this lot is under estimated.

Grantanow

It certainly is a Tory scam. The reason given for introducing voter ID was stated to be voter fraud. The fact is that voter fraud is trivial. Most election fraud is perpetrated by a few candidate bad apples who should be weeded out by their Parties. The object is to reduce voting by the poor, students and others who have much to gain by voting against the Tories.

If you are poor, a student or anything else it’s easy to apply for
The voter card mentioned bygrowstuff above.
If you can’t be arsed to do that then you wouldn’t be voting anyway.
Not everything is a ‘Tory scam’😄

👏👏👏 Oreo.

There are far more worrying things going on that could affect our freedom than Voters ID. 15 Minutes Cities, LTNs and digital currency. We need to pick our hill to die on and fight for less control of our lives voter ID is not one I feel strongly about but the digital currency and 15 minute cities are.

Maggs I assume you think 15 minute cities are some sort of control conspiracy?
I think you are very very wrong.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2023/02/08/15-minute-city-conspiracy-theories-insane-says-15-minute-city-creator/amp/

NotSpaghetti

Maggs I assume you think 15 minute cities are some sort of control conspiracy?
I think you are very very wrong.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2023/02/08/15-minute-city-conspiracy-theories-insane-says-15-minute-city-creator/amp/

You know, when I see headlines in the Guardian (which is a respectable paper which doesn't promulgate conspiracy theories) about the potential for the Chinese to use police cameras (presumably made in China) to spy on the UK, then I don't feel overly happy about having to carry around more cards with chips in them...

Who said you had to carry an ID card with a chip in it?
15 minute cities seem to be a good idea, for those who would like the benefits they would bring. Why would you think they’re a way of controlling people?