May 2023 Local Elections

So we are going to have our first election in May that will require a photo id.

Do people think that will have any impact on the turn-out and/or result?

The suspicion is that this has only been brought in because it will disadvantage the young and poor who are less likely to vote Tory.

Indeed there were only 6 cases of voter fraud in the 2019 election so it would appear that it is a "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist.

These are the acceptable forms of id:

• A passport issued by the UK, any of the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, a British Overseas Territory, an EEA state or a Commonwealth country
• A driving licence issued by the UK, any of the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or an EEA state
• A biometric Immigration document
• An identity card bearing the Proof of Age Standards Scheme hologram (a PASS card)
• Ministry of Defence Form 90 (Defence Identity Card)
• A Blue Badge
• A national identity card issued by an EEA state
• An Older Person’s Bus Pass
• A disabled person’s Bus Pass
• An Oyster 60+ card
• A Freedom Pass
• A Scottish National Entitlement card issued in Scotland
• A 60 and Over Welsh Concessionary Travel card issued in Wales
• A Disabled Person’s Welsh Concessionary Travel Card issued in Wales
• A Senior Smart Pass issued in Northern Ireland
• A Registered Blind Smart Pass or Blind Person’s Smart Pass issued in Northern Ireland
• A War Disablement SmartPass or War Disabled SmartPass issued In Northern Ireland
• A 60+ SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
• A Half Fare Smart Pass issued in Northern Ireland
• An Electoral Identity Card issued In Northern Ireland
• A Voter Authority Certificate or a temporary Voter Authority Certificate

It does seem to favour the old. Note: a student card is not acceptable.

Are the poor as likely to have a driving licence or a passport if they can't afford a car or overseas travel?

And will these two groups be inclined to apply for the Government's election photo id?

It will be interesting to see if the results reflect the polls and, if they don't, what kind of bounce the Tories get.

 

My initial take is I'm not sure any effect will be visible given they're local elections and so usually have low turnout anyway, skewed more towards the more engaged voters, and given where we are in the election cycle.

 

I hope there is a right stink about it, so they have to amend it to any piece of paper with your name on it.

If that happens, then using it first time for the local elections is firing your biggest missile on an important target. Hopefully the effect on a GE will be minimal.

It’s certainly about voter suppression and for this reason alone the Tories should be wiped from the face of electoral politics.

 

There are three entire true blue councils up for the vote in Herts: Herstmere, Dacorum and East Herts?

 

To add some anecdotal perspective, if I moved back to the UK today I wouldn't be able to vote as I don't have any of those.

 

I'm always struck by how open to abuse the present voting process is. Which makes the fact that people don't by and large abuse the system something worth celebrating and suggests to me that the thinking behind the plan to make voters prove their identity very dubious indeed

 

To move back to the U.K. without a U.K. passport, wouldn’t you have to have some sort of biometric immigration document ?

 

No.

 

So how do you prove to U.K. Border Force that you are a British citizen if you don’t have a U.K. passport?

 

Non-UK passport plus visa waiver travel makes it a moot point. You don't have to prove anything along those lines.

 

Ok, and that would be sufficient for you to be able to move to the U.K so as to be resident for the purposes of voting?

 

I don't need permission to reside in the UK. I'm a birth national, and I have a birth certificate to prove it. The only problem to solve for is reaching the country and entering through I&C, for which a foreign passport from a visa waiver country is more than sufficient.

None of those documents are valid photo ID for voting under the above rules.

 

Yeah, sorry I was trying to edit my post to expand it and then lost It.

I see this completely. It does seem to be a loophole. I wonder how many people it affects. There is something callead a biometric residence permit which I presume would be sufficient in this instance but there is of course an argument that a British national like yourself should not be required to get it (it’s not even clear to me that you would be eligible). In any case, if you were getting one of those, you might as well get yourself a U.K. passport. I imagine that would be the Government’s response.

https://www.gov.uk/biometric-residence-permits

 

Point is, evidence – or even suspicion of – voter fraud is the UK is so vanishingly low that this is a measure brought in to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

According to the electoral commission, in 2021, across all the polls in the UK there were 315 cases investigated by police and 0 convictions. ONE caution was issued.

So the question is why the current Government think this is necessary, and the answer is pretty obvious.

 

The proposal has been kicking around for a while, but yes - absolutely.

 

6 Known cases.

It amazes me you can just rock up, quote an address and name and that's it.

That being said since covid I've had a postal vote and find it far more convenient. Not having to meet the general public is worth it's weight in gold.

 

I am sure we would know if this was widespread. If I turned up to vote in the evening and my name was already crossed off as having voted, I wouldn't go away meekly saying "that's OK then".
I've used the postal voting system sometimes, but to my mind that is even more open to other forms of interference.

 

Unless you know the person you are impersonating a) hasn't voted already and b) isn't going to, it's a pretty risky business for a very marginal return. Out of all of the millions of votes cast in the last few years, the fact that only 6 potential ID frauds have been reported should tell you everything you need to know.

 

It honestly astonished me that people think this is such a widespread issue.

Lets think about this for a moment: to cast a fraudulent vote, you need to drive to the polling station, go in, give a false wrong name/address that actually corresponds to a real person, hope they haven't voted yet, and if all those stars align you get to add one single vote to the tally.

Totally worth the invested time and the personal risk of a fine/prison, that.

 

And hope they don't recognise you when you go back in to the poling station to cast your legitimate vote!

 

I've seen two 'iffy instances and, in retrospect, seeing how nasty local (AKA Tory) polticking is in the 'Wood I should have bought this to attention (should I have made a citizen's arrest?). A bloke turned up with a handful of proxy votes (preusmably from one of the 'Wood's nursing homes that are close to the town centre; one of these really got my spidey sense tingling as the bloke had turned up to the wrong polling station.

 

People only thought it was a big issue when they were told about it, same as so much more bs being spouted by the right wing. Most people dont give a **** about anything until they are are told to be upset about it by brain numbing headlines and rhetoric.

 

This was being discussed elsewhere:

 

Tories informing people in Norwich that no ID is required to vote.

Eastern Daily Press story.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/23481650.norwich-conservative-leaflet-says-voter-id-not-needed/

Local MP unhappy.

 

I hope someone doesn't pinch my ID and not bother to vote in the local elections in my name

 

Bit like your ST for next season?

 

I'm slightly embarrassed to say that I'll be renewing for next season. Hopefully events on the pitch will be more entertaining than watching some of the people around me getting close to combusting!

 

Yes, I’ve renewed despite going to few games this season…early season TV games scuppered some attendance, whilst the turgid fare under Edwards left me cold. Pre-WC performances under Bilic left me optimistic, but after Xmas I just lost all enthusiasm. The fact it’s effectively a 6-hour trip with the drive doesn’t help, but only 3 years ago that never bothered me.

I’m treating next season as fully ‘last chance saloon’. The fact it’s only £241 for me played a part; had it been the full price I probably wouldn’t have bothered.

 

I've missed more home games this. season than I ever have - and I haven't got the excuse of living far away to wave in my defence. I don't think the World Cup helped but almost from the off there has been something downbeat and flat about watching Watford.

 

That's shown the Tories!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

In my ward, I s'pose, as a very wise philosopher once said "...two outta three ain't bad...":

 

Charlie on BBC breakfast news is absolutely LIVID that despite all the common sense views he presents daily, people Still aren't voting Tory. He is severely miffed.

He concedes it's been a rough night for the Conservatives, but he consoles himself with regular reminders that it's "early days yet" and that the results aren't really reflective of the "Rishi success story".

Now, let's get back to some more 'news' about the coronation.


Ooh just noticed Bargain Hunt is on the other side. Let's leave poor Charlie to his impotent tory rage and royal rectal kissing...

 

It's amusing to hear what the losers have to say in these circumstances (and Labour would be the same).

They come out with "it's early days", "it's what we expected", "Labour should be doing better", "it's based on a low turn out so is not that relevant", "it's based on voter reaction to May/Johnson - Sunak will turn it around".

Why can't they just admit that they have taken the country in a direction that the majority are unhappy with and either change direction or call a GE and let the people choose the national government that they now want?

 

Erm, you understand politics, do you?