I voted yesterday after work forgot my polling card for first time , so I said I'm sorry no polling card I was asked my address that was it didn't have to show Id

That can't be good enough can it

It says on the card that you don’t need to bring it,that is strange.Even worse for me,I tried three times to vote but,the queues were about an hour long each time.As it was a bit nippy,I went home and came back later but,each time the queue was long.They were probably only allowing two in at a time even though hundreds were allowed in the snooker.I had more chance of catching something in the queue as there were no markers and people were standing closer than a metre.

Percy plunkett wrote:It says on the card that you don’t need to bring it,that is strange.Even worse for me,I tried three times to vote but,the queues were about an hour long each time.As it was a bit nippy,I went home and came back later but,each time the queue was long.They were probably only allowing two in at a time even though hundreds were allowed in the snooker.I had more chance of catching something in the queue as there were no markers and people were standing closer than a metre.

I'd strongly recommend getting a postal vote. Takes all the stress out of it on the day if you're running late, there's bad weather or if there are queues.

As for Jim's point, Percy's right that you've never needed to take a polling card. As long as you know your name and address, you can vote. Quite right too - we should keep the process as easy as possible. Low turnout is a far greater threat to our democracy than the vanishingly rare instances of personation.

It’s probably got something to do with the area you live in. I’ve never had a problem here. Never been asked for my voting card and we normally know some of the officials in the polling station anyway. If there was a dodgy call I reckon it would get spotted. They probably have procedures in place anyway. Could be a different scenario in larger areas I suppose. Swings and roundabouts as well. As well as having checks in place, they do need to keep the process as simple as possible so as not to deter voters.

Kairdiff Exile wrote:

Percy plunkett wrote:It says on the card that you don’t need to bring it,that is strange.Even worse for me,I tried three times to vote but,the queues were about an hour long each time.As it was a bit nippy,I went home and came back later but,each time the queue was long.They were probably only allowing two in at a time even though hundreds were allowed in the snooker.I had more chance of catching something in the queue as there were no markers and people were standing closer than a metre.

I'd strongly recommend getting a postal vote. Takes all the stress out of it on the day if you're running late, there's bad weather or if there are queues.

As for Jim's point, Percy's right that you've never needed to take a polling card. As long as you know your name and address, you can vote. Quite right too - we should keep the process as easy as possible. Low turnout is a far greater threat to our democracy than the vanishingly rare instances of personation.

I know you don't need a polling card but to me just giving a name and address has to be open to vote frauds

UPTHEPORT wrote:

Kairdiff Exile wrote:

Percy plunkett wrote:It says on the card that you don’t need to bring it,that is strange.Even worse for me,I tried three times to vote but,the queues were about an hour long each time.As it was a bit nippy,I went home and came back later but,each time the queue was long.They were probably only allowing two in at a time even though hundreds were allowed in the snooker.I had more chance of catching something in the queue as there were no markers and people were standing closer than a metre.

I'd strongly recommend getting a postal vote. Takes all the stress out of it on the day if you're running late, there's bad weather or if there are queues.

As for Jim's point, Percy's right that you've never needed to take a polling card. As long as you know your name and address, you can vote. Quite right too - we should keep the process as easy as possible. Low turnout is a far greater threat to our democracy than the vanishingly rare instances of personation.

I know you don't need a polling card but to me just giving a name and address has to be open to vote frauds

Seem to recall when I was manning a polling station, admittedly a very long time ago, we had the right to ask to see an official form of documentation with your name and address on.

From today's Guardian

Britons will have to show photo ID to vote in future general elections, ministers are poised to confirm this week, as a means of tackling fraud which critics claim could deter poorer and ethnic minority voters from taking part in democracy.

Whilst this addresses Jim's concerns about personation, it effectively puts voting behind a paywall. Roughly quarter of voters don't have a passport or driving licence. The fact that those people are disproportionately younger and poorer (and therefore demographically less likely to be Tory voters) is no accident.

As I said above - what's the problem that this is supposed to be resolving? The same article states "in 2019 there was just one conviction and one police caution for impersonating another voter" - so it's hard to avoid the conclusion that this is being done in the name of party politics rather than pragmatism.

Well I'm no Tory supporter but something has to be done.

I agree with you. I disagree with the ‘electronification’ of all personal data but in some circumstances, it is needed. That’s life I suppose. I still have a paper driving licence, no photo on that. Some people, as mentioned, will not want to go on line to get their data confirmed.

I had a problem in the past with confirming details as some government agencies wouldn’t accept an RAF ID card as proof of who you were. It’s ridiculous. That was mandatory.

I believe this requirement today is politically motivated. Easy solution, as per Armed Forces. If it is mandatory requirement to get ID, get the government to set up stations to photograph people, then they do the paperwork for the forms, not you. Everyone could then have an official ID. If it can be done for the Armed Forces, it can be done for the general public.

If the government are so set of implementing this idea then cost should not be an issue.

UPTHEPORT wrote:Well I'm no Tory supporter but something has to be done.

But why, when there was only one conviction at the 2019 General Election for voter personation? That doesn't suggest there's a problem - whereas disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of younger and poorer voters would be a tangible weakness in democracy. At the very least, surely you'd concede it's a sledgehammer to crack a nut?

Kairdiff Exile wrote:

UPTHEPORT wrote:Well I'm no Tory supporter but something has to be done.

But why, when there was only one conviction at the 2019 General Election for voter personation? That doesn't suggest there's a problem - whereas disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of younger and poorer voters would be a tangible weakness in democracy. At the very least, surely you'd concede it's a sledgehammer to crack a nut?

That's one they know of

Perhaps before election when they send out polling cards those without photo id should have to set up a password online or via a phone call

They still would have to give name address perhaps dob plus password

UPTHEPORT wrote:

Kairdiff Exile wrote: ...there was only one conviction at the 2019 General Election for voter personation? That doesn't suggest there's a problem

That's one they know of

I think we owe it to ourselves to make public policy on the basis of facts though, don't we? If there were even suspicions of mass voter personation affecting results, then we'd see defeated parties challenging results in the courts - or at least highlighting the problem through the media. We don't see any of those things, because it simply isn't an issue. I have friends who campaign for all the main parties (and some of the fringe ones) and not one of them considers voter personation to be a problem that needs addressing.

The only conclusion, as stated above, is that it's being done for nakedly political reasons. It's the thin end of the wedge - you only have to look to the US to see how voter rights for poorer voters (disproportionately those from ethnic minorities as well) have been gradually eroded to try and game the system for Republicans. Let's also remember that those with disabilities are less likely to have a driving licence or a passport as well. The losers from these changes will massively be drawn from the most marginalised groups in society.

It is estimated that 3.5 million registered voters do not have photo ID.

Regardless of whether the government finance and facilitate ID cards it will not reach all these people and a significant number will be disenfranchised. The government know this and they also know that 1 prosecution and 1 caution for fraud at a General Election is a remarkably low figure.

So if you didn't already know you can now see what the real purpose of the legislation is.

Robert Buckland, a Tory MP for Swindon, says that he doesn't believe in ID cards but you should show photo ID to vote!

"The most effective way in which Swindon residents can vote to end the nonsense of ID cards will be to vote Conservative at the next election".

Robert Buckland, September 2007.