the Electoral Commission says meant some people were "regrettably unable to vote"

[MolteniArcore]

The Tories were against national ID cards but then suddenly want voter ID… I wonder why? It doesn’t take a genius to work it out. Just look at the lists of acceptable ID and how it is weighted towards pensioners compared to young people.

If you can’t work this out you are just stupid.

 

[Caesium137]

Shameful

Local elections 2023: Critics say voter ID rule should be scrapped https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65492275

What it should read is 'As intended by the Tory party, some people they think are regrettable couldn't vote'.

 

[Laughing]

I don't think anyone believes this was anything but voter supression by the tory party, do they? If you accept this, and if you don't you need to re-think, then it isn't a good thing, regardless of whether it was 1 person denied their democratic right, or thousands. It is inherently wrong.

Regardless of the local election results, this is shameful. On the plus side, it doesn't seem to be helping the tories too much.

 

[MolteniArcore]

I don't think anyone believes this was anything but voter supression by the tory party, do they? If you accept this, and if you don't you need to re-think, then it isn't a good thing, regardless of whether it was 1 person denied their democratic right, or thousands. It is inherently wrong.

Regardless of the local election results, this is shameful. On the plus side, it doesn't seem to be helping the tories too much.

We don’t know if it helped the Tories or not, we can only speculate atm. But if it HAS helped them they really would have suffered some BIG losses without ID.

 

[Chris_Boro]

Maidstone and Kent had 137 people turned away for no ID. 20 never returned.

Again, this is just people who entered the station.

 

[coluka]

It really is an attempt to stop groups of people that may predominantly vote for other parties, nobody can make a coherent argument as to why it is necessary. It is a blatant claim of trying to fix something that was never broken in the first place.

I have no problem with everyone having government supplied I.D cards, I would never feel it was infringing my personal freedoms or civil liberties. One card could easily hold the information needed to be accessed from a central database with access to certain areas of a database being limited. They already hold details, where people have them, for our passport details, driving details, insurance data, income, taxation, banking etc, its just not co-ordinated in one place as far as I can tell.

ID cards would make life easier for us all at times and would certainly assist the Police. If it was made compulsory, free and available to all aged 16 and above, then fair do’s, but until then you should not need photo ID as it prevents the many people who don’t drive or hold passports, bus passes, Oyster cards etc. The right to vote should never be denied to those with a right to do so, fundamentally it should be free to all as it is the most basic right in a democratic society. Until ID cards are compulsory and freely available to all, no such requirement should be placed on a citizen of the UK wanting to exercise the right to vote.

 

[Laughing]

It really is an attempt to stop groups of people that may predominantly vote for other parties, nobody can make a coherent argument as to why it is necessary. It is a blatant claim of trying to fix something that was never broken in the first place.

I have no problem with everyone having government supplied I.D cards, I would never feel it was infringing my personal freedoms or civil liberties. One card could easily hold the information needed to be accessed from a central database with access to certain areas of a database being limited. They already hold details, where people have them, for our passport details, driving details, insurance data, income, taxation, banking etc, its just not co-ordinated in one place as far as I can tell.

ID cards would make life easier for us all at times and would certainly assist the Police. If it was made compulsory, free and available to all aged 16 and above, then fair do’s, but until then you should not need photo ID as it prevents the many people who don’t drive or hold passports, bus passes, Oyster cards etc. The right to vote should never be denied to those with a right to do so, fundamentally it should be free to all as it is the most basic right in a democratic society. Until ID cards are compulsory and freely available to all, no such requirement should be placed on a citizen of the UK wanting to exercise the right to vote.

The problem with ID cards is it will extend to being legally required to identify yourself to a police officer. Right now you don't unless you are suspected of committing a crime. Furthermore the officer has to articulate which crime he suspects you may have committed.

Essentially, up to no good isn't good enough.

 

[Since1973]

I think you can use expoed photo ID such as passports

 

[Since1973]

Expired

 

[Jedi boro]

Two votes prevented a Labour majority in Hartlepool.

What you won't see is people who turned away before entering the polling station as they had no ID and people who never bothered leaving home because they had no ID.

We need to encourage more people to vote, not add additional barriers.

Exactly 2 is 2 too many.

Like i said number of fraud is 9 ….9. So what is more ridiculous.

And that is just 2 people at one polling booth so times that by how many polling booths and it’s a Lot more than 9.

 

[Kowalski]

I think you can use expoed photo ID such as passports

You certainly can, I did yesterday.

 

[coluka]

The problem with ID cards is it will extend to being legally required to identify yourself to a police officer. Right now you don't unless you are suspected of committing a crime. Furthermore the officer has to articulate which crime he suspects you may have committed.

Essentially, up to no good isn't good enough.

I have no issue with identifying myself to a police officer, i really don’t understand why any decent citizen would. There would need to be acceptable grounds for a requirement to produce it, I would have no issue with being stopped and searched in the street or pulled over in a vehicle if there was a suspected issue etc, I have nothing to hide, if I did, then I’d deserve being pulled. Clearly the rules would need to be fair, reasonable and equitable, with a right to complain, just incase they were being abused by enforcement officers.

 

[Corcaigh_the_Cat]

I was a polling clerk yesterday so am probably better placed to comment.

Of over 500 voters like to guess how many were turned away through not having identity? TWO. Yes two. One of those went home and returned with identity to vote.

If this was representative across the country the issue has been misrepresented. The electorate included a fair number of 18 year olds voting for the first time.

Any complaints? Again only 2 people.

Half a dozen turned away in one small part of our ward.

 

[Laughing]

I have no issue with identifying myself to a police officer, i really don’t understand why any decent citizen would. There would need to be acceptable grounds for a requirement to produce it, I would have no issue with being stopped and searched in the street or pulled over in a vehicle if there was a suspected issue etc, I have nothing to hide, if I did, then I’d deserve being pulled. Clearly the rules would need to be fair, reasonable and equitable, with a right to complain, just incase they were being abused by enforcement officers.

You say as a white man, I assume.

 

[Corcaigh_the_Cat]

I have no issue with identifying myself to a police officer, i really don’t understand why any decent citizen would. There would need to be acceptable grounds for a requirement to produce it, I would have no issue with being stopped and searched in the street or pulled over in a vehicle if there was a suspected issue etc, I have nothing to hide, if I did, then I’d deserve being pulled. Clearly the rules would need to be fair, reasonable and equitable, with a right to complain, just incase they were being abused by enforcement officers.

The rules would change constantly and people wouldn't be aware of their rights. Look at who the PCC is, do you really think he'd fight your corner once wrongdoing occurs?

There's no need for ID in this country.

 

[Ziggy]

In 2014 the Electoral Commission recommended voter ID to ease public concerns over voter fraud despite it not being a significant problem.

"Evidence collected by the Commission in its review of electoral fraud revealed that fraud is not widespread in the UK but, despite this, a significant proportion of the public remain concerned that it is taking place.

This has the potential to undermine confidence in the electoral system if not addressed."


Electoral Commission

At the same same time they did say there was ‘concerns’ over postal voting.

(

 

[JackG]

I bought a new Pass ID Card this week to open a new business bank account. I used it to vote but it was rejected by the bank. I have an old paper driving licence like several million (over 8million) of us and my passport has expired. There are a lot of people out there without photo ID.

You can use an expired passport, as long as you are identifiable from the photo.

 

[JackG]

I have no issue with identifying myself to a police officer, i really don’t understand why any decent citizen would. There would need to be acceptable grounds for a requirement to produce it, I would have no issue with being stopped and searched in the street or pulled over in a vehicle if there was a suspected issue etc, I have nothing to hide, if I did, then I’d deserve being pulled. Clearly the rules would need to be fair, reasonable and equitable, with a right to complain, just incase they were being abused by enforcement officers.

Did Wayne Couzens write this?

 

[coluka]

You say as a white man, I assume.

Why should skin colour matter? If the rules are clear, fair and equitable to all in the first place, with the right to complain if subsequently abused by individual officers. Any officer abusing their role would soon become clear and should be reviewed to ensure racism, or any other unwarranted issue wasn’t present.

If I had a criminal record (my Abba collection does not count) I would expect to be of interest in the future and stopped and searched. Anyone who has a history of criminality should expect occasional stop and searches and questioning, it would be a price you should factor in and pay for committing crime in my view.

 

[Laughing]

Why should skin colour matter? If the rules are clear, fair and equitable to all in the first place, with the right to complain if subsequently abused by individual officers. Any officer abusing their role would soon become clear and should be reviewed to ensure racism, or any other unwarranted issue wasn’t present.

If I had a criminal record (my Abba collection does not count) I would expect to be of interest in the future and stopped and searched. Anyone who has a history of criminality should expect occasional stop and searches and questioning, it would be a price you should factor in and pay for committing crime in my view.

Skin colour shouldn't matter. Unfortunately it does. Black men are stopped much more frequently than white men. It's a fact.