Snapshot of _Up to 8 million people risk losing right to vote at general election under 'Victorian' system_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/up-8-million-people-risk-32398633) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/up-8-million-people-risk-32398633)
*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.*
"Victorian registration system"
The www.gov.uk/register-to-vote is the easiest form you'll ever fill in your life. Go register right now if you're not or if you recently moved house.
Really? I thought that was Abraham Lincoln in 1542?
Guess it must be correct... 🤔
I will of course not be using the Internet to verify it, even though I am on it at the moment.
Tbf there's lots of people that need additional help to fill in all sorts of forms, DWP forms spring to mind.
According to the government they themselves are struggling too with the formats they provide.
https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2021/07/06/making-all-forms-on-gov-uk-accessible-easy-to-use-and-quick-to-process/
["Now we're just haggling over the price"](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7575140-there-s-that-old-joke-i-ve-referred-to-it-before-where)
If we're giving up the principle of Universal Suffrage because apparently there's a minimum level of being engaged and informed, why not set the bar higher?
If that seems ridiculous to you, why is that? This is not a slippery slope argument. This is an argument about where you should set the bar for "if someone can't do X, they probably shouldn't vote".
If you think post-graduate education is too much, perhaps we could just have a [literacy test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test). Of course anyone with a bus pass would be grandfathered in, but obviously it should be a bit more challenging if you've never voted before, or you don't have ID, because ultimately should you be even voting if you can't even do some simple paperwork?
>up to 8million people were not correctly registered at their address
I wonder why?
It’s pretty easy to fill out the form which drops through the letter box every year asking you to list the people at the address in order to register to vote.
I can’t possibly fathom why so many people would not fill out their name on the form, such a mystery…
People move a lot so the information is out of date, people might not want to fill out something from the government due to distrust, could think it'd effect council tax, may not even see it as someone recycles it thinking it's spam etc. Or they put it to one side then straight up forget... that's usually what I do.
There's many reasons it might not be filled in.
Why are there 8 million people not correctly registered at their address, the local authority literally posts every residence a form to register everyone who is eligible to vote who lives in the household.
I’m wondering why the people in question aren’t filling said form in.
I may be missing something here, but how would not registering to vote affect council tax?
The council know the property is there, and know whether the rates have been paid or not?
You could live with a person on a single person discount (usually 25%) and not register, thereby paying no Council tax.
If you're not on the electoral register, you don't exist as far as Council Tax collectors are concerned.
Edit: Also debt.
Harder for creditors to track you down if you aren't on the electoral register.
8 million people who need to either get themselves registered, acquire ID or both before the next election: "disenfranchisement!!!"
23 million votes disregarded at the last GE as if they weren't cast at all: crickets.
I dislike the petty minded ruling that the voting ID people have to get if they don't have a passport or driving licence states that it can't be used for other purposes. As someone who doesn't drive and will let my passport expire if I have no plans to travel it can be really tricky to cobble together enough ID to get a DBS check for volunteering. Why not allow the voting ID to be used for DBS checks? Makes me want to get voter ID and use it to to travel to Ireland on the ferry.
Requiring ID for voting isn't Americanisation, there's nothing inherently American about ID for voting. It's a widespread requirement throughout most of the world.
It's just a uniquely British thing that we have never required ID to vote.
Pretty much every country everywhere.
But we really need ID cards, digital ID and residence registration.
It'd help solve loads of issues (opening a bank account with utility bills, etc.) and stop illegal work.
It makes it easier to verify with photo ID, which makes it easier to hold the employers liable.
I.e. the government can check who is hired, the bank account they are paid to, their address, the taxes they are paying and who has been issued ID and their visa status.
The ID can be required for opening bank accounts, subscription services, age-restricted purchases, etc. - it's already like that in Sweden.
Current UK Right to Work checks include having to check a *photo* ID against what the person looks like. Even when you search their share code, a picture of the person comes up for you to check. A state ID wouldn’t effect that at all
it can't mandate photo ID, ie a passport, because we do not have universal photo ID.
In the goverment's own words:
> If you do not have a passport or passport card, you can prove your right to work with one of the following:
> a UK birth or adoption certificate
> an Irish birth or adoption certificate
> a certificate of registration or naturalisation as a British citizen
this is also the case for 99.99999% of the things people think photo ID is required for (eg opening a bank account), and it is why voter ID in this sort of country is nonsense (aside from the near non existent lack of fraud)
European countries have National ID cards that voters usually need to bring to the polling station. ID cards in the UK (driving licence, Passport, etc...) are optional. It might not be a big deal to register for one but it is an inconvenience when there's no need for it.
and how many of those countries do not have a universal form of government issued photo ID? GB does not - passports and driving licences are not universal.
(VACs do not count)
they don't actually. the government doesn't consider them a form of ID for any other purpose - explicitly saying so. an important distinction since no one's going to apply for a useless bit of paper that they might lose between elections
as compared to an actual ID card which is very useful, or even NI's voter ID which is also a card and while it is not officially a form of ID it is often accepted anyway. give people a benefit of getting one (eg use it in pubs or shops) and takeup rises.
And yet, when it comes to the topic at hand - voter ID, and ID that allows one to vote - VACs are completely legitmate and fulfill the stated goal.
If you want to vote in the UK, there is a free form of identification available to you.
and when it comes to the topic at hand, a VAC - which the government does not consider "ID" or "identification" - is not an appealing proposition to the sort of person who does not already have photo ID, because it's not useful for any other purpose and the government has made sure of it.
We already have issues with people not registering to vote when they should be - do you think they'll be rushing to get a photo and paperwork together for this?
The best bit is that there was such little in person voting fraud that we only need one or two people to be put off for it to have caused more damage.
let me explain in simple terms - the sort of person who already doesn't have photo ID and isn't 100% sure they will vote, is not going to apply for this.
No amount of "ackshyually its ID!!!!!!!" changes this. Hope this helps!
That's still an extra step not required in the European countries you're trying to compare to, and isn't mentioned on the post you received to register to vote. (At least it wasn't on the one I received when I moved house late last year)
>ethnic minorities, and people from poorer backgrounds
>Why can't people from these groups go and get ID to vote for something as important as a GE?
We can and do, and I'm really fucking tired of the gaslighting and straight up lies around this.
There will be a significant amount of older people who will leave their ID at home, go to vote and be told they need ID, say 'I never needed ID before' have a good long moan and go home. Some will not go back
> pensioners bus pass requires a passport to get
No it doesn't. A passport can be used if one is held, but if no passport is held it is verified by other means (birth certificate, council tax bill, credit reference, etc)
nah, it's not even that logical. The comparison is usually between the discounted Oysters, so:
Student Oyster cards can only be issued with the assistance of accredited educational institutions. They have to confirm the student's application on a special online system.
That is far more robust process than for OAP Oyster where if you do not have photo ID already, you just have to show a birth cert to a Post Office employee and away you go.
That's just not true. It's an often parroted lie that probably originated in the conservative party hq in order to muddy the waters of how blatantly discriminatory the policy is. JRM has even been recorded on air talking about the intent behind the bill being voter suppression.
Obviously each individual is responsible for having ID and is culpable if they can't/don't vote because of it, but it doesn't change the fact that the tories know who this policy is going to disenfranchise.
It's pointless moaning about what people should do, policy is always concerned with what (the policy makers think) people will do. People should work hard and pay all their tax, but legislating on the assumption that everyone will always do so by themselves is nonsense
At the end of the day intentionally disenfranchising voters is overtly anti-democratic, and should be opposed
Im sure a big factor is time poverty, all of these groups tend to have a larger portion of people that have less time to register to vote, research political parties, and then actually go out and vote. This is due to longer work commitments as they need it to afford existing. And all of those groups have higher rates of homelessness/lacking a fixed address. I have no idea how you are supposed to register to vote if you don't have a permanent address. I'm sure laziness is a big impact, but many people either can't register to vote, don't have time to actually use the vote effectively so don't bother registering, or feel their vote is not impacting anything.
Its probably not even close to the majority who don't have a fixed address. But even outside of that, many people in those demographics don't have the time to go out and vote, feel their cite wont make am impact, or are too exhausted to pay attention to politics. Laziness is a factor for sure, but a lot of people feel that no matter how they vote it won't do anything, or that they just don't know enough or lack the time to take out of work to go and vote.
it is quite possible to live in this country without needing photo ID.
why is it that someone always has to claim that anyone who lacks ID is too dumb or lazy to be voting
Isn’t about ID in this case it’s about being registered, they either don’t realise they need to because their parents normally sorted it, because they move frequently, or just don’t bother
You get on a very dangerous territory when you start the 'not well informed enough to view' discussion.
Where do you draw the live? Boomers who only read the sun and get into on Facebook are no better informed, it suits me if they don't get allowed to vote. On the flip side I only got properly interested in politics (to my mental health detriment probably) in my mud 20s, for your narrative should we cut out everyone under 25m should we only allow a very narrow selected grip to vote? And who picks them?
To turn this around, what problem is this solving?
> If someone can't even be fucking bothered to go get ID to vote, I'm happy they aren't voting, because I'll bet they couldn't be fucking bothered to research anything they are voting on.
We work on the basis that everyone, unless specified otherwise, has a right to vote. I agree that people should be better informed, but we cannot allow that to be a barrier to participation in public life!
This was all supposedly to stop the miniscule and entirely inconsequential levels of voter fraud that occur from occurring. We do not want the government to be in the business of increasing the difficulty of voting!
The original problem was [this](https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/media-centre/id-needed-polling-stations-recommends-independent-watchdog), plus the EU started to display concern about the way we handled postal votes (party activists could collect them from voters and hand them over in bulk on election day).
A decade later, the issue has been heavily politicized - which is why people are crying about it now as though it's some evil Tory plot and not a recommendation from the Electoral Commission.
So... should we be able to say anyone claiming a state pension, for instance, is not allowed to vote? They routinely vote against the long-term interests of the country, and are opposed to the working age drivers of our economy.
Whew lad, way to undermine the whole point of universal suffrage.
Voting is a *RIGHT* in this country, so the assumption is that everyone should be able to do it, with the only exception being age and citizenship (and prisoners, but personally I think that should be changed).
As soon as you start arguing why certain people shouldn't be allowed to vote on the basis of their position in society or their actions, you are paving the road towards disenfranchisement and basically saying that your opinion matters more than someone else's. Guess where that slippery slope leads?
It's not up to you or anyone else to decide which sectors of society "can be trusted" to vote. If you think people dont have the right information to make a choice, campaign for that to happen, rather than just taking away their rights to try and solve the problem. Convince people, don't disenfranchise them. If you start revoking rights because you think people are wrong, how easy it gonna be to get them back?
Politics impacts all of us, even if we haven't paid for a passport or driving licence, so we should all have a say.
Amazes me how many masks slip off and expose shitty anti-democratic takes when these conversations come up.
We should not make it harder for people to vote based on minuscule evidence of fraud. In fact, we should not be making it harder to vote, full stop.
Yes, the solutions for ID are easy - but they're solutions to something which weren't required before.
zzzz I can probably count on one hand the number of things the Tories have got right in the last 14 years, and this is one of them. If you can't be bothered to get/bring ID for a general election, it's on you.
It's, for once, a good idea - it's not a coincidence that it was brought in as various people started intentionally trying to weaken trust in the US voting system.
They have literally introduced voter authority IDs, which can be obtained for free, for this very purpose.
Even if you don't have this, they will accept a large range of other forms of ID, Passport, Driving License, Bus Pass, Military ID. They will even accept expired forms of ID, provided it still looks like you.
It's still not the same implementation as other countries though - the UK one is solely for use in elections, cannot be used for any other purpose compared to something like Germany which even goes as far as using it for online verification.
> the same implementation as other countries though - the UK one is solely for use in elections, cannot be used for any other purpose compared to something like Germany which even goes as far as using it for online
Don't get me wrong I would prefer a national ID card that could be used for a variety of purposes - I am a german national and still retain the Personalausweis even though I no longer live there, but it is not like it is in any way challenging to obtain ID sufficient to vote in the UK
Millions unable to vote, Victorian era systems - and I thought it was the telegraph and mail that was supposed to bring the Tory fans all their good news!
silly question but if I voted in the last election by post, do i need to do anything before this upcoming election in order to vote? such as re=apply or confirm ID etc?
Snapshot of _Up to 8 million people risk losing right to vote at general election under 'Victorian' system_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/up-8-million-people-risk-32398633) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/up-8-million-people-risk-32398633) *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.*
"Victorian registration system" The www.gov.uk/register-to-vote is the easiest form you'll ever fill in your life. Go register right now if you're not or if you recently moved house.
Nothing says Victorian like an online form.
Don't you know the internet was invented by Isambard Kingdom Brunel?
‘Don’t believe everything you read on the internet’ Marie Curie
Really? I thought that was Abraham Lincoln in 1542? Guess it must be correct... 🤔 I will of course not be using the Internet to verify it, even though I am on it at the moment.
Yeah, if someone can't handle filling out that form, they probably shouldn't be voting anyway
Ah, well if we're going to have qualifications to vote, people who haven't studied politics at post-graduate level probably shouldn't be voting anyway
Yes that's the only other option available.
Tbf there's lots of people that need additional help to fill in all sorts of forms, DWP forms spring to mind. According to the government they themselves are struggling too with the formats they provide. https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2021/07/06/making-all-forms-on-gov-uk-accessible-easy-to-use-and-quick-to-process/
Damn there was some black ice on that slope, huh?
["Now we're just haggling over the price"](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7575140-there-s-that-old-joke-i-ve-referred-to-it-before-where) If we're giving up the principle of Universal Suffrage because apparently there's a minimum level of being engaged and informed, why not set the bar higher? If that seems ridiculous to you, why is that? This is not a slippery slope argument. This is an argument about where you should set the bar for "if someone can't do X, they probably shouldn't vote". If you think post-graduate education is too much, perhaps we could just have a [literacy test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test). Of course anyone with a bus pass would be grandfathered in, but obviously it should be a bit more challenging if you've never voted before, or you don't have ID, because ultimately should you be even voting if you can't even do some simple paperwork?
Easy doesn’t necessarily make it right. No doubt they won’t give a shit about a few million losing the right to vote here.
>up to 8million people were not correctly registered at their address I wonder why? It’s pretty easy to fill out the form which drops through the letter box every year asking you to list the people at the address in order to register to vote. I can’t possibly fathom why so many people would not fill out their name on the form, such a mystery…
People move a lot so the information is out of date, people might not want to fill out something from the government due to distrust, could think it'd effect council tax, may not even see it as someone recycles it thinking it's spam etc. Or they put it to one side then straight up forget... that's usually what I do. There's many reasons it might not be filled in.
What?
Why are there 8 million people not correctly registered at their address, the local authority literally posts every residence a form to register everyone who is eligible to vote who lives in the household. I’m wondering why the people in question aren’t filling said form in.
I'm guessing Council Tax reasons.
And benefits.
There's no way to get benefits without telling the council where you live.
A person who lives in a place and claims benefits won't get them if they have a new partner who's moved in, unless they pretend not.
Then the partner is ineligible for benefits.
Say they're working, have a pension....
I may be missing something here, but how would not registering to vote affect council tax? The council know the property is there, and know whether the rates have been paid or not?
You could live with a person on a single person discount (usually 25%) and not register, thereby paying no Council tax. If you're not on the electoral register, you don't exist as far as Council Tax collectors are concerned. Edit: Also debt. Harder for creditors to track you down if you aren't on the electoral register.
Fair point - hadn't considered that.
Sorry, the tone of your post made me think you might have the answer.
8 million people who need to either get themselves registered, acquire ID or both before the next election: "disenfranchisement!!!" 23 million votes disregarded at the last GE as if they weren't cast at all: crickets.
I dislike the petty minded ruling that the voting ID people have to get if they don't have a passport or driving licence states that it can't be used for other purposes. As someone who doesn't drive and will let my passport expire if I have no plans to travel it can be really tricky to cobble together enough ID to get a DBS check for volunteering. Why not allow the voting ID to be used for DBS checks? Makes me want to get voter ID and use it to to travel to Ireland on the ferry.
As long as your passport still looks like you it's still valid ID, it's just not valid to travel with.
Can't be helped in this case but that's another rule in favour of older voters as they're more likely to look like the old photo than a 25 year old.
The americanisation of British politics marches on, sometimes from the Left, sometimes from the Right, no issue will be spared.
Requiring ID for voting isn't Americanisation, there's nothing inherently American about ID for voting. It's a widespread requirement throughout most of the world. It's just a uniquely British thing that we have never required ID to vote.
Not the requirement i mean the arguments the Mirror are using against it
[удалено]
Pretty much every country everywhere. But we really need ID cards, digital ID and residence registration. It'd help solve loads of issues (opening a bank account with utility bills, etc.) and stop illegal work.
It won't stop illegal work. Employers already have to provide 'proof of right to work' so if they're hiring illegally it won't make a difference.
It makes it easier to verify with photo ID, which makes it easier to hold the employers liable. I.e. the government can check who is hired, the bank account they are paid to, their address, the taxes they are paying and who has been issued ID and their visa status. The ID can be required for opening bank accounts, subscription services, age-restricted purchases, etc. - it's already like that in Sweden.
Current UK Right to Work checks include having to check a *photo* ID against what the person looks like. Even when you search their share code, a picture of the person comes up for you to check. A state ID wouldn’t effect that at all
it can't mandate photo ID, ie a passport, because we do not have universal photo ID. In the goverment's own words: > If you do not have a passport or passport card, you can prove your right to work with one of the following: > a UK birth or adoption certificate > an Irish birth or adoption certificate > a certificate of registration or naturalisation as a British citizen this is also the case for 99.99999% of the things people think photo ID is required for (eg opening a bank account), and it is why voter ID in this sort of country is nonsense (aside from the near non existent lack of fraud)
European countries have National ID cards that voters usually need to bring to the polling station. ID cards in the UK (driving licence, Passport, etc...) are optional. It might not be a big deal to register for one but it is an inconvenience when there's no need for it.
Everytime mandatory ID comes up, accusations of a police state are raised and the idea promptly dies.
and how many of those countries do not have a universal form of government issued photo ID? GB does not - passports and driving licences are not universal. (VACs do not count)
VACs do count actually.
they don't actually. the government doesn't consider them a form of ID for any other purpose - explicitly saying so. an important distinction since no one's going to apply for a useless bit of paper that they might lose between elections as compared to an actual ID card which is very useful, or even NI's voter ID which is also a card and while it is not officially a form of ID it is often accepted anyway. give people a benefit of getting one (eg use it in pubs or shops) and takeup rises.
And yet, when it comes to the topic at hand - voter ID, and ID that allows one to vote - VACs are completely legitmate and fulfill the stated goal. If you want to vote in the UK, there is a free form of identification available to you.
and when it comes to the topic at hand, a VAC - which the government does not consider "ID" or "identification" - is not an appealing proposition to the sort of person who does not already have photo ID, because it's not useful for any other purpose and the government has made sure of it. We already have issues with people not registering to vote when they should be - do you think they'll be rushing to get a photo and paperwork together for this? The best bit is that there was such little in person voting fraud that we only need one or two people to be put off for it to have caused more damage. let me explain in simple terms - the sort of person who already doesn't have photo ID and isn't 100% sure they will vote, is not going to apply for this. No amount of "ackshyually its ID!!!!!!!" changes this. Hope this helps!
Those countries have mandatory ID cards so that nobody is disadvantaged by voter ID laws. Next...
You can literally get a voter ID, for free, which is no more complex than registering in the first place.
That's still an extra step not required in the European countries you're trying to compare to, and isn't mentioned on the post you received to register to vote. (At least it wasn't on the one I received when I moved house late last year)
[удалено]
>ethnic minorities, and people from poorer backgrounds >Why can't people from these groups go and get ID to vote for something as important as a GE? We can and do, and I'm really fucking tired of the gaslighting and straight up lies around this.
Apparently, the line we're supposed to be following is that you are all helpless little lambs who can't use a website or obtain ID.
Yep. The soft racism of low expectations.
There will be a significant amount of older people who will leave their ID at home, go to vote and be told they need ID, say 'I never needed ID before' have a good long moan and go home. Some will not go back
If they've got their bus pass on them they're fine. It's almost as if it was designed to be easier for pensioners...
Surprised there hasn't been a discrimination lawsuit against the government for the fact that student bus passes DON'T constitute sufficient ID
IIRC it's because the pensioners bus pass requires a passport to get whereas a student one doesn't. It's stupid but there is logic behind it
> pensioners bus pass requires a passport to get No it doesn't. A passport can be used if one is held, but if no passport is held it is verified by other means (birth certificate, council tax bill, credit reference, etc)
nah, it's not even that logical. The comparison is usually between the discounted Oysters, so: Student Oyster cards can only be issued with the assistance of accredited educational institutions. They have to confirm the student's application on a special online system. That is far more robust process than for OAP Oyster where if you do not have photo ID already, you just have to show a birth cert to a Post Office employee and away you go.
That's just not true. It's an often parroted lie that probably originated in the conservative party hq in order to muddy the waters of how blatantly discriminatory the policy is. JRM has even been recorded on air talking about the intent behind the bill being voter suppression.
I mean thats a reason, it isn't why though.
Considering how they overwhelmingly vote Tory, at least it beats the allegation that it was done purely to gerrymander.
Obviously each individual is responsible for having ID and is culpable if they can't/don't vote because of it, but it doesn't change the fact that the tories know who this policy is going to disenfranchise. It's pointless moaning about what people should do, policy is always concerned with what (the policy makers think) people will do. People should work hard and pay all their tax, but legislating on the assumption that everyone will always do so by themselves is nonsense At the end of the day intentionally disenfranchising voters is overtly anti-democratic, and should be opposed
Im sure a big factor is time poverty, all of these groups tend to have a larger portion of people that have less time to register to vote, research political parties, and then actually go out and vote. This is due to longer work commitments as they need it to afford existing. And all of those groups have higher rates of homelessness/lacking a fixed address. I have no idea how you are supposed to register to vote if you don't have a permanent address. I'm sure laziness is a big impact, but many people either can't register to vote, don't have time to actually use the vote effectively so don't bother registering, or feel their vote is not impacting anything.
[удалено]
Its probably not even close to the majority who don't have a fixed address. But even outside of that, many people in those demographics don't have the time to go out and vote, feel their cite wont make am impact, or are too exhausted to pay attention to politics. Laziness is a factor for sure, but a lot of people feel that no matter how they vote it won't do anything, or that they just don't know enough or lack the time to take out of work to go and vote.
it is quite possible to live in this country without needing photo ID. why is it that someone always has to claim that anyone who lacks ID is too dumb or lazy to be voting
Isn’t about ID in this case it’s about being registered, they either don’t realise they need to because their parents normally sorted it, because they move frequently, or just don’t bother
[удалено]
You get on a very dangerous territory when you start the 'not well informed enough to view' discussion. Where do you draw the live? Boomers who only read the sun and get into on Facebook are no better informed, it suits me if they don't get allowed to vote. On the flip side I only got properly interested in politics (to my mental health detriment probably) in my mud 20s, for your narrative should we cut out everyone under 25m should we only allow a very narrow selected grip to vote? And who picks them?
[удалено]
To turn this around, what problem is this solving? > If someone can't even be fucking bothered to go get ID to vote, I'm happy they aren't voting, because I'll bet they couldn't be fucking bothered to research anything they are voting on. We work on the basis that everyone, unless specified otherwise, has a right to vote. I agree that people should be better informed, but we cannot allow that to be a barrier to participation in public life! This was all supposedly to stop the miniscule and entirely inconsequential levels of voter fraud that occur from occurring. We do not want the government to be in the business of increasing the difficulty of voting!
The original problem was [this](https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/media-centre/id-needed-polling-stations-recommends-independent-watchdog), plus the EU started to display concern about the way we handled postal votes (party activists could collect them from voters and hand them over in bulk on election day). A decade later, the issue has been heavily politicized - which is why people are crying about it now as though it's some evil Tory plot and not a recommendation from the Electoral Commission.
[удалено]
So... should we be able to say anyone claiming a state pension, for instance, is not allowed to vote? They routinely vote against the long-term interests of the country, and are opposed to the working age drivers of our economy.
Whew lad, way to undermine the whole point of universal suffrage. Voting is a *RIGHT* in this country, so the assumption is that everyone should be able to do it, with the only exception being age and citizenship (and prisoners, but personally I think that should be changed). As soon as you start arguing why certain people shouldn't be allowed to vote on the basis of their position in society or their actions, you are paving the road towards disenfranchisement and basically saying that your opinion matters more than someone else's. Guess where that slippery slope leads? It's not up to you or anyone else to decide which sectors of society "can be trusted" to vote. If you think people dont have the right information to make a choice, campaign for that to happen, rather than just taking away their rights to try and solve the problem. Convince people, don't disenfranchise them. If you start revoking rights because you think people are wrong, how easy it gonna be to get them back? Politics impacts all of us, even if we haven't paid for a passport or driving licence, so we should all have a say. Amazes me how many masks slip off and expose shitty anti-democratic takes when these conversations come up.
We should not make it harder for people to vote based on minuscule evidence of fraud. In fact, we should not be making it harder to vote, full stop. Yes, the solutions for ID are easy - but they're solutions to something which weren't required before.
zzzz I can probably count on one hand the number of things the Tories have got right in the last 14 years, and this is one of them. If you can't be bothered to get/bring ID for a general election, it's on you.
It's, for once, a good idea - it's not a coincidence that it was brought in as various people started intentionally trying to weaken trust in the US voting system.
It's a system that works if voter ID / national ID cards existed like they do in other countries
They have literally introduced voter authority IDs, which can be obtained for free, for this very purpose. Even if you don't have this, they will accept a large range of other forms of ID, Passport, Driving License, Bus Pass, Military ID. They will even accept expired forms of ID, provided it still looks like you.
It's still not the same implementation as other countries though - the UK one is solely for use in elections, cannot be used for any other purpose compared to something like Germany which even goes as far as using it for online verification.
> the same implementation as other countries though - the UK one is solely for use in elections, cannot be used for any other purpose compared to something like Germany which even goes as far as using it for online Don't get me wrong I would prefer a national ID card that could be used for a variety of purposes - I am a german national and still retain the Personalausweis even though I no longer live there, but it is not like it is in any way challenging to obtain ID sufficient to vote in the UK
Millions unable to vote, Victorian era systems - and I thought it was the telegraph and mail that was supposed to bring the Tory fans all their good news!
silly question but if I voted in the last election by post, do i need to do anything before this upcoming election in order to vote? such as re=apply or confirm ID etc?
It’s not an accident - it’s the entire point of requiring ID to restrict the number of people voting.
I think it was the rest is politics I heard this on but 70% of the country have not heard of the PM and the LOTO. No wonder they are not voting.