Voter ID checks

[Sandydragon]

It has felt strange in the past when voting that all I have to do is tell the officials my name and I get a ballot paper. I'm not even obliged to deliver the voting card that gets pushed through my door. There is obvious potential for abuse here, even though, by and large, the system has worked for a long time with no major complaints.

However, the recent case in Tower Hamlets has caused a re-think and it may be that voters will be required to show some kind of ID when physically casting their vote in a voting station.

I'm not too bothered about complaints regarding civil liberties; I think the benefits for fighting fraud outweigh those concerns. yet a couple of issues do arise:

1. What if you have no state produced ID. Most people probably could provide a photo driving license, but not everyone. Not everyone has a passport.
2. Proxy and postal voting. This has to be the area for potentially the greatest fraud.

Full article here

Voter ID checks demanded to stamp out election fraud
Oliver Wright, Policy Editor
August 12 2016, 12:01am, The Times

Sir Eric Pickles said fraud, such as that in Tower Hamlets, was more evident in communities of Pakistani and Bangladeshi background
Voters should be subjected to identity checks in polling stations to stop the “worrying spread” of electoral fraud, the government’s anti-corruption tsar says.

In a report to Theresa May, Sir Eric Pickles, the former communities secretary, said that Britain’s “trust-based” voting system was no longer tenable and that “politically correct sensibilities” had led to the state turning a blind eye to fraud in elections.

Sir Eric criticised the police for being soft on allegations of wrongdoing, saying that they sometimes acted like the three wise monkeys.

He called for sweeping changes to the voting system, including tougher checks on electoral registration and new laws that would compel voters to produce a driving licence, passport or utility bill before being able to cast their ballot.

The report was commissioned after last year’s Tower Hamlets election court case, which resulted in the disqualification of , Lutfur Rahman, the London borough’s elected mayor. In the report, published today, Sir Eric warned that such fraud was more evident in communities of Pakistani and Bangladeshi background where “an individual’s right to vote in secret and exercise free choice may not be fully valued”.


He said that there was clear evidence of pressure being put on vulnerable members of some ethnic minority communities, particularly women and young people, to vote according to the will of the elders. Yet state institutions had turned “a blind eye to such behaviour because of ‘politically correct’ over-sensitivities about ethnicity and religion”, he added.

He said that electoral fraud had been allowed to take place in Muslim communities because of fears surrounding “political correctness”.

Launching his findings and 50 recommendations, Sir Eric said he did not believe that corrupt practices were isolated and that wholesale change was needed to ensure the integrity of the electoral system.

He said: “The worrying and covert spread of electoral fraud and state of denial by some bodies threatens our nation’s proud heritage as the ‘mother of Parliaments. It is time to take action to take on the electoral crooks and defend Britain’s free and fair elections.”

He said it was astonishing that after the Tower Hamlets court case no criminal prosecution had been brought by the Metropolitan police. Sir Eric pointed out that the court had disqualified Mr Rahman for a litany of corrupt and illegal practices that had been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Sir Eric also criticised the electoral commission for failing to act “despite years of warnings on misconduct in Tower Hamlets”.

Sir Eric’s recommendations include a new role for the National Crime Agency in election fraud cases and banning political activists from handling postal ballot papers.

Writing in The Daily Telegraph, Sir Eric says that “issues” of community cohesion should never be an excuse for failing to “uphold the rule of law and protect British liberties”.

Chris Skidmore, minister for the constitution, said that the government would look closely at the recommendations.

The full report is available here, including the 50 recommendations that Pickles makes.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _fraud.pdf

It does mention in there that postal voting on a permanent basis should be discontinued and approved on a three yearly basis only.

[Zhivago]

It has felt strange in the past when voting that all I have to do is tell the officials my name and I get a ballot paper. I'm not even obliged to deliver the voting card that gets pushed through my door. There is obvious potential for abuse here, even though, by and large, the system has worked for a long time with no major complaints.

However, the recent case in Tower Hamlets has caused a re-think and it may be that voters will be required to show some kind of ID when physically casting their vote in a voting station.

I'm not too bothered about complaints regarding civil liberties; I think the benefits for fighting fraud outweigh those concerns. yet a couple of issues do arise:

1. What if you have no state produced ID. Most people probably could provide a photo driving license, but not everyone. Not everyone has a passport.
2. Proxy and postal voting. This has to be the area for potentially the greatest fraud.

Full article here

Voter ID checks demanded to stamp out election fraud
Oliver Wright, Policy Editor
August 12 2016, 12:01am, The Times

Sir Eric Pickles said fraud, such as that in Tower Hamlets, was more evident in communities of Pakistani and Bangladeshi background
Voters should be subjected to identity checks in polling stations to stop the “worrying spread” of electoral fraud, the government’s anti-corruption tsar says.

In a report to Theresa May, Sir Eric Pickles, the former communities secretary, said that Britain’s “trust-based” voting system was no longer tenable and that “politically correct sensibilities” had led to the state turning a blind eye to fraud in elections.

Sir Eric criticised the police for being soft on allegations of wrongdoing, saying that they sometimes acted like the three wise monkeys.

He called for sweeping changes to the voting system, including tougher checks on electoral registration and new laws that would compel voters to produce a driving licence, passport or utility bill before being able to cast their ballot.

The report was commissioned after last year’s Tower Hamlets election court case, which resulted in the disqualification of , Lutfur Rahman, the London borough’s elected mayor. In the report, published today, Sir Eric warned that such fraud was more evident in communities of Pakistani and Bangladeshi background where “an individual’s right to vote in secret and exercise free choice may not be fully valued”.


He said that there was clear evidence of pressure being put on vulnerable members of some ethnic minority communities, particularly women and young people, to vote according to the will of the elders. Yet state institutions had turned “a blind eye to such behaviour because of ‘politically correct’ over-sensitivities about ethnicity and religion”, he added.

He said that electoral fraud had been allowed to take place in Muslim communities because of fears surrounding “political correctness”.

Launching his findings and 50 recommendations, Sir Eric said he did not believe that corrupt practices were isolated and that wholesale change was needed to ensure the integrity of the electoral system.

He said: “The worrying and covert spread of electoral fraud and state of denial by some bodies threatens our nation’s proud heritage as the ‘mother of Parliaments. It is time to take action to take on the electoral crooks and defend Britain’s free and fair elections.”

He said it was astonishing that after the Tower Hamlets court case no criminal prosecution had been brought by the Metropolitan police. Sir Eric pointed out that the court had disqualified Mr Rahman for a litany of corrupt and illegal practices that had been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Sir Eric also criticised the electoral commission for failing to act “despite years of warnings on misconduct in Tower Hamlets”.

Sir Eric’s recommendations include a new role for the National Crime Agency in election fraud cases and banning political activists from handling postal ballot papers.

Writing in The Daily Telegraph, Sir Eric says that “issues” of community cohesion should never be an excuse for failing to “uphold the rule of law and protect British liberties”.

Chris Skidmore, minister for the constitution, said that the government would look closely at the recommendations.

The full report is available here, including the 50 recommendations that Pickles makes.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _fraud.pdf

It does mention in there that postal voting on a permanent basis should be discontinued and approved on a three yearly basis only.

Regarding your 1st point:
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/_ ... report.pdf

See page 47

Regarding your 2nd point:
See page 31 onwards

[Sandydragon]

Your page references were way out. But never mind.

Page 5 provides a promise to make provision for voters without ID by the end of 2014. The fact that Pickles is still raising this point suggests nothing has been done though.

Regarding proxy and postal votes they make no major recommendations, other than to crack down on non-existent voters through NI numbers.

That report was from Jan 14, so 2 and a half years later and Pickles is raising the same issues again. Worthy of some discussion then, yes?

[Zhivago]

Your page references were way out. But never mind.

Page 5 provides a promise to make provision for voters without ID by the end of 2014. The fact that Pickles is still raising this point suggests nothing has been done though.

Regarding proxy and postal votes they make no major recommendations, other than to crack down on non-existent voters through NI numbers.

That report was from Jan 14, so 2 and a half years later and Pickles is raising the same issues again. Worthy of some discussion then, yes?

Pickles is one guy. This report was much more comprehensive.

Regarding the page numbers that I reference, they are of the pdf file, and not the report numbers at the bottom of the pages. The report does not number the first 3 pages which leads to it being out of sync.

[Sandydragon]

Your page references were way out. But never mind.

Page 5 provides a promise to make provision for voters without ID by the end of 2014. The fact that Pickles is still raising this point suggests nothing has been done though.

Regarding proxy and postal votes they make no major recommendations, other than to crack down on non-existent voters through NI numbers.

That report was from Jan 14, so 2 and a half years later and Pickles is raising the same issues again. Worthy of some discussion then, yes?

Pickles is one guy. This report was much more comprehensive.

Regarding the page numbers that I reference, they are of the pdf file, and not the report numbers at the bottom of the pages. The report does not number the first 3 pages which leads to it being out of sync.

Yet pickles is pushing for more. Good thing or bad?

[BBD]

I think it's dangerous to be dismissive of civil liberties entirely, it's a valid concern. There is a snowball effect as time rolls on and what starts as a perfectly reasonable request with a logical and ethical purpose eventually runs the risk of being used for less noble purposes. For example the regulations for checks for money laundering prevention have become used by banks to try and upsell additional services, most bank customers blindly nod and go along with the request because they don't know the real requirements, hear something official sounding and are effectively duped,and the banks get their opportunity to increase their coffers

The hoops we have to jump through are becoming ridiculous, last week I had to send copies of 3 forms of id to someone for a bit of work, they then emailed back asking that I go to the post office to get the copies verified by a post master. He checked them versus the originals, stamped them, signed them and charged me a fiver

There's always going to be a balance, but it's always a game of cat and mouse between fraudsters and the authorities, the price if we don't play along is increased chance of fraud and the fallout of corruption. If we play along it increases costs and inconveniences people, it's a no win game

[Zhivago]

I think it's dangerous to be dismissive of civil liberties entirely, it's a valid concern. There is a snowball effect as time rolls on and what starts as a perfectly reasonable request with a logical and ethical purpose eventually runs the risk of being used for less noble purposes. For example the regulations for checks for money laundering prevention have become used by banks to try and upsell additional services, most bank customers blindly nod and go along with the request because they don't know the real requirements, hear something official sounding and are effectively duped,and the banks get their opportunity to increase their coffers

The hoops we have to jump through are becoming ridiculous, last week I had to send copies of 3 forms of id to someone for a bit of work, they then emailed back asking that I go to the post office toget the copies verified by a post master. He checked them versus the originals, stamped them, signed them and charged me a fiver

There's always going to be a balance, but it's always a game of cat and mouse between fraudsters and the authorities, the price if we don't play along is increased chance of fraud and the fallout of corruption. If we play along it increases costs and inconveniences people, it's a no win game

My bank normally does this for me for free

[Digby]

Big changes are need on the postal voting front, that's where nearly all of the fraud is, the Labour government of the time was expressly warned about it but went ahead anyway with woefully inadequate safeguards, and no one has since made any attempt to correct the blatant subversive attack on democracy.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

I think it's dangerous to be dismissive of civil liberties entirely, it's a valid concern. There is a snowball effect as time rolls on and what starts as a perfectly reasonable request with a logical and ethical purpose eventually runs the risk of being used for less noble purposes. For example the regulations for checks for money laundering prevention have become used by banks to try and upsell additional services, most bank customers blindly nod and go along with the request because they don't know the real requirements, hear something official sounding and are effectively duped,and the banks get their opportunity to increase their coffers

The hoops we have to jump through are becoming ridiculous, last week I had to send copies of 3 forms of id to someone for a bit of work, they then emailed back asking that I go to the post office to get the copies verified by a post master. He checked them versus the originals, stamped them, signed them and charged me a fiver

There's always going to be a balance, but it's always a game of cat and mouse between fraudsters and the authorities, the price if we don't play along is increased chance of fraud and the fallout of corruption. If we play along it increases costs and inconveniences people, it's a no win game

Indeed.

I'm sceptical that there's a sufficient problem with voter fraud to justify the requirement for voter id. I would want very very loose controls, and certainly nothing like state documents. Frankly if someone could produce any firm of id or the polling card that should be more than sufficient.

[Sandydragon]

Big changes are need on the postal voting front, that's where nearly all of the fraud is, the Labour government of the time was expressly warned about it but went ahead anyway with woefully inadequate safeguards, and no one has since made any attempt to correct the blatant subversive attack on democracy.

Undoubtedly, this completely trumps the risk of fraud elsewhere.