It's not only younger people who don't know this stuff though. It might be that many of the older people happen to have the right forms of ID - because that's how the Tories designed the system. But thanks for confirming you don't believe everyone has the right to vote. It's quite funny that you talk about it as such a hard earned right and yet are so happy to caveat it so flippantly. The right was won for ALL adults to vote, not just the well informed / lucky. You'll note the forms of ID aren't free of course...
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
It's not only younger people who don't know this stuff though. It might be that many of the older people happen to have the right forms of ID - because that's how the Tories designed the system. But thanks for confirming you don't believe everyone has the right to vote. It's quite funny that you talk about it as such a hard earned right and yet are so happy to caveat it so flippantly. The right was won for ALL adults to vote, not just the well informed / lucky. You'll note the forms of ID aren't free of course...
Absolutely.
It seems that some advocate making the voting process harder for "younger people". Which inevitably games the system for the Tories. Alongside their gerrymandering, the current FPTP system and the right wing press in the UK, we do not have a functioning democracy.
Why stop at ID cards ? Personally I favour a wipeout style course placed in front of the voting booth.
If people really cared about voting then they’ve got 4 years to prepare with fitness and to practise. Also it would help make the public become more self aware about their overall health.
If people really cared about voting then they’ve got 4 years to prepare with fitness and to practise. Also it would help make the public become more self aware about their overall health.
On the one hand I violently disagree with this suggestion, but on the other hand I can't wait to see it!
My take away?
"Voting is a privaledge"
"Voting is a privaledge"
Exactly! Get rid of the boring David Dimbleby rubbish and instead replace it with a 24 hour BBC live stream on Election Day.
Imagine the tension with 20 minutes to go before the polls close, watching Suzanne aged 64 trying to clear the big red balls, in order to vote to cut disability benefits. Labour voters celebrating in Wembley Park, after Suzanne gets a concussion from the robotic punching boxing glove.
Also we could have special time slots for when the party leaders(Instead of debates) or famous people are going to take on the wipeout course. At 7:00 PM Sunak and Starmer will face off and then the last hour is some light entertainment, time slots for Ant & Dec or that old lady from bake off who used to hit her kids.
Yes, that's right all adults are entitled to vote, all they have to do is to turn up with the required proof of who they are... no problem whatsoever.... the rich, the poor, young adults (at/over the age of voting), the old, anyone of any ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, etc all are eligible providing they turn up with ID. Moreover they can vote in secret, and by their own hand, not via a machine whose workings can misfire (although I won't be surprised if this requirement changes in the not too distant future) and vote also by approved postal mechanisms.
There is really no reason under the new ID rules for anyone who wants to vote and is eligible and obtains the required ID proof, not to vote, unless by personal preference.
Why do you think that the conservative party were so keen to get these voting rule changes through when there were so few cases of fraud?
Possibly to prevent the level of fraud increasing? Possibly taking a leaf out of the US play-book, who knows?
It still makes sense to try to ensure everyone who turns up to vote is eligible and ID proof, from a range of options, is the best way... I guess, can you think of another?
Strikes me as naive. Or you are intentionally avoiding what is the most likely reason?
I saw nothing wrong with the previous requirements. Those on the right would be calling this a "slippery slope" if it wasn't something that was going to benefit them and their interests.
If you have to pay for the proof then not all adults have the right to vote because not all adults have any money. And you know that, because despite your best efforts to demonstrate the opposite, you're not stupid. And you also know that kids who are voting for the first time, or old people who maybe can't keep up with the news like they used to, are the least likely to know about the ID rules as well and are also more likely to be excluded. Again because you're not stupid.
So yes you are advocating for people not to be able to vote i.e. a "citizen democracy" or whatever where you have to prove yourself worthy in order to gain a vote. Which is actually not what our forefathers in the war and the brave suffragists and unions fought for. They fought for the fundamental human right for all adults to vote. Not "adults who prove themselves worthy by some arbitrary process".
Yes that is obvious! See reference to US play-book!!
Sorry... have to laugh at this first sentence, its complete nonsense... in this context. The 'right to vote' stands, nothing can take that away, money or no money... being able to produce proof because of having no money does sound very harsh, citizens advice could probably help in such circumstances.
I am sure kids voting for the first time will definitely find out what they need, the sheer excitement in being able to vote for the first time. I read everything I could get hold of about such matters when I reached voting age.
As for old people, well some I know will forget i.e. 'cognitive impairment' etc. but some I know will tell you they don't vote because they feel they are not in a position/ and therefore should not vote, on the future.
Why do you insist on talking about 'proving worth'.... its about proving who you say you are....nothing whatsoever to do with 'worthiness'... whatever that means?
Hardly strikes me as good policy for the country then. Just for the tories.
Yes it may turn out that way, but I somehow don't think (or hope) so. Perhaps all depends on Scotland is there enough Labour voters with ID?
After all didn't the focus on the recent SNP leadership battle show that somehow the Party had lost something like 40,000 members somewhere?
Your experience of being a young person is a) many decades ago and b) not the same as every other person's experience of being that age. Whilst it's great that you were all excited and knew everything, that isn't true for everyone and even a cursory look at surveys and stats, or even just asking some people on the street yourself if you fancied it, would prove that out.
There's people in this very thread that you're choosing to ignore that have talked about people they know not understanding the new rules. Your highly disingenuous opinion is therefore that those people are not worthy to vote. All adults are worthy to vote, that is the basic principle of our democracy. If you exclude people from that process, which you inevitably will every single time, not just this once, because there'll always be some new voters who didn't know, someone who's lost their passport, someone who forgets it etc, then you're deliberately excluding those people.
And you're doing it ostensibly to prevent voter fraud that there's absolutely no evidence happens in greater numbers than will be excluded by this move. Not even close in fact. That being the case, it is clear that you think it's good to exclude that inevitable number of people from the process as you value their votes less highly than a problem that doesn't exist.
And again, you know you're being disingenuous, you're just arrogant enough to think that those people's votes aren't worth as much as yours.
Last edited:
The voter ID laws are a travesty and a poll tax. Clearly done to favour the Government.
On the bolded part. How does one get the required ID without paying for it?
Keir "the feck kinda name is that" Starmer seems a bit shit tbh. No ideology convictions whatsoever, just always saying whatever he thinks will get him the most plaudits at that particular moment.
Tony Bleurgh.
According to The Electoral Commission website you can apply for a FREE Voter Authority Certificate
Every persons vote is worth the same.
You are the one making out something different and being disingenuous with it by suggesting that the Government, in asking for proof of identity, are mitigating against some people and are seeking to prevent them from voting because they might not vote Tory... that's frankly rubbish and you know it.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/voter/voter-id/applying-a-voter-authority-certificate
Bit of a pain. You could also postal vote. It's a clear extra step for a lot of people and it would impact more non conservative voters.
More Milliband really, funny but poor old Ed seems largely forgot about. His Labour were just the same, largely because its the same strategy folks at play.
Staying close to the Tories, a fresh new start from the previous leader, absence of policy. He was allowed to just float on and then the Tories ramped up the character attacks when they needed to.
The same will be done with Starmer, only question is if that outweighs the hate for the Tory party.
Stop trolling it got boring long ago. There's enough substantiated evidence about voter ID and it's differing impacts that your opinion is pretty worthless.
Don't eat that billy goat. There'll be a bigger one trip-trapping across your bridge soon enough.
Providing ID is a clear extra step for everybody who intends to vote at the next GE, not just those applying for a free Voting Authority Certificate.
Care to answer the earlier question about why you personally think the government has deemed a 60+ oyster card a valid id but not an 18+ oyster card or young person railcard (both of which contain names and faces)?
oh dear... 'stop trolling' is it... sounds like you are losing the argument?There is no reason why anyone who is eligible to vote, and wants to vote, will be prevented by the ID changes, from voting. That is of course unless they cannot be bothered and want an excuse for not exercising their rights; you seem to have swallowed the bait that this will be mainly non-Tory voters?
Perhaps you are thinking of Jeremy Corbyn' (about to be disenfranchised) and his supporters... that will be a good excuse... the Tory changes did for us in the end!
There is no reason why anyone who is eligible to vote, and wants to vote, will be prevented by the ID changes, from voting. That is of course unless they cannot be bothered and want an excuse for not exercising their rights; you seem to have swallowed the bait that this will be mainly non-Tory voters?
Perhaps you are thinking of Jeremy Corbyn' (about to be disenfranchised) and his supporters... that will be a good excuse... the Tory changes did for us in the end!
The governments own pilots and consultations disagree with your viewpoint. All a matter of public record.
Got me there... no idea my friend... perhaps its because the Tories don't want an even bigger Labour vote in London and feel they might even be in with a chance of winning some of the inner London seats, if they can stop a significant number of 18+ oyster card uses being registered?
My advice to 18+ oyster card holders get yourself a Free Voting Authority Certificate, and dump your oyster card as its clearly a 'tool of the oppressor'
I think you will find these studies highlight the (albeit relatively small) risk that does exists for some groups and for various reasons and it urges the Government to make contingency plans, one of which seems to be the FREE Voting Authority Certificate... and I do agree they will have to 'light a fire' under some councils on these matters.
This still does not negate my view that being asked to provide evidence of your identity in order to ensure eligibility is not onerous and only prevents those who whilst having a right, wont follow the rules to exercise that right, and thereby disenfranchise themselves.
First I've heard this. This should be advertised. Along with the fact you need to apply for this in order to exercise your right to vote unless you have a driving licence or passport or are an OAP.
At last something we can agree on.
I'm not a Blair fan (far from it), but he did actually have ideas and his government actually did make quite a lot of positive changes. He's an absolute nothing compared to Blair, no substance at all.
I've worked in and managed elections for local authorities. There are already several checks and balances already in place for voting. Outside of Parliamentary and one off national elections (EU Referendum), turnouts for elections are dreadful and it's already a challenge encouraging people to vote. This will further worsen that. There is no evidence of mass voter fraud or anything of the sort. In my authority we had one case investigated which turned out to be nothing. This is clearly designed to favour the more traditional Tory voters (e.g older people) and disenfranchise the younger population.
You refer to 'lighting a fire' under some Councils. You are clearly clueless or just very dim. Councils have had their funding slashed and are struggling to balance the books and provide local services but yeah sure lets give them more responsibility to issue voter certificates. Why not make more ID eligible instead? No of course not because it would make it easier for younger people who mostly vote Labour to vote. Tories know that people will either not get the ID or will not be bothered to vote.
The point everyone makes is that there was no reason to bring in these changes, its wasting time and money.