please empty your brain below
|
|
You almost say it in your last paragraph: It’s anti-democratic…
Southern Heights (Light Railway) | 08.05.22 - 7:15 a.m. | #
|
In leafy Kingston upon Thames there has been one case of dodgy voting. A man used the Polling Card of the previous resident at his address. Unfortunately, said previous resident also turned up to vote and was given a pink ballot paper. This enables the vote to count and the paper to be found easily for investigation.
The fraudulent voter prosecuted. He was a Police Officer and duly lost his job. This was a good few years ago now and I don't recall another local case, but others might.
RosemaryT | 08.05.22 - 7:31 a.m. | #
|
I wonder if there is a combined data set that could allow ranking of all elections for closeness as a % of potential electorate (including those that could register but did not, possibly allowing for existing postal voters).
That would allow assessment of possible altered outcomes caused by foregone registration as a result of stricter identification requirement.
MilesT | 08.05.22 - 7:56 a.m. | #
|
Photo ID for voting is OTT. As the stats show, the problem is tiny compared to the cost (The cost being the potential disenfrancisement of some legitimate voters). But the Conservatives have been gagging for national ID cards for years. Requiring photo ID for voting is their way to sneak it in.
Haven't decided whether ID cards are a good or bad thing, though.
Jon Jones | 08.05.22 - 8:30 a.m. | #
|
I registered for a postal vote some years ago when expecting to be on holiday on election day. I've kept it ever since.
Occasionally I hand it in at the polling station, just for nostalgia.
Man of Kent | 08.05.22 - 8:55 a.m. | #
|
|
How effective is photo ID anyway, are those at the polling station (aka a dimly lit hall) going to take their time to carefully scrutinize a small 'x' year old photo and confirm that it matches the person stood in front of them.
Still Anon | 08.05.22 - 9:00 a.m. | #
|
"remembering to send a photo to the council in advance."
Nope, when I got my English bus pass I was photographed on the spot.
Voter Id seems to work fine in Northern Ireland but the conspiracy theorists take care not to mention this.
Mike D | 08.05.22 - 9:41 a.m. | #
|
|
Here in Australia we have compulsory voting for Federal and State elections plus preferential voting although I am not convinced that all voters fully understand how preferences work. I like the compulsory voting system as most of the identity issues are sorted out in advance.
herbof's bruvver | 08.05.22 - 10:29 a.m. | #
|
Anything that involves paying for a passport photo and postage, or having to visit the Council offices on a weekday, implies an extra cost in finances or time. This would put a lot of people off, particularly as there's the logic that "one vote either way won't make a difference".
Even the most seamless approach - using a smartphone app to send a photo to the Council, risks discriminating against those uncomfortable with technology.
James | 08.05.22 - 10:43 a.m. | #
|
|
Sickening. Another example of the Tories mimicking the crazed Republican party. Anything to stay in power. The left is already fighting an overwhelmingly biased media in this country. As we see in Russia with support for Putin, despite the slaughter in Ukraine, whoever controls the media is able to control public opinion.
Colin | 08.05.22 - 10:46 a.m. | #
|
|
Rahman
Kim | 08.05.22 - 11:10 a.m. | #
|
Voter fraud in person probably isn’t a big problem, but citing existing crime statistics is plainly disingenuous when it’s currently virtually impossible to be caught. I’m not a fan of the legislation because it is over the top, but if anything it brings us into line with the rest of Europe and assuages concerns for very little cost.
I genuinely find it odd that people like Colin are so keen to compare it with America but turn a blind eye to our far more similar European neighbours, a choice they are, I’d wager, unlikely to make when it comes to economics or single markets or gun control or abortion.
As for FPTP, there are a very significant number of spoilt ballots in the current system and an even greater number of people who are just plain confused. In fact, the only people who benefit from it currently are the politically savvy - mostly white, male, young to middle aged, middle class people, if that’s the game we’re playing. FPTP has far lower rates of spoilt ballots and is very easy to understand; it’s also what we’re used to in this country. and I wouldn’t be so certain it’ll give Conservatives an advantage - Reform and Heritage, with lots of second vote Tory voters, had a good showing last London mayoral election. If Lab and LD continue to set up de facto electoral pacts the advantage will probably be theirs
barbicanman | 08.05.22 - 11:11 a.m. | #
|
|
Anecdotally most electoral fraud occurs with postal votes. Voter ID is just vote suppression
kerspatula | 08.05.22 - 11:50 a.m. | #
|
I tend to resent comments about FPTP being better because it's easier to understand. It's a fundamentally flawed and unfair voting system which encourages tactical voting and the hegemony of two large parties. A better system like STP at least does not discourage you from voting for favourite candidate first but still having a "say". See CGP Grey's videos on voting systems on YouTube for an animal-based breakdown.
We shouldn't pick something because it's simple when it's demonstrably worse than the alternative. Introduce a proper voting system and after an election or two everyone will be up to speed. Unfortunately we wasted the public mental capacity for voting system switches on the AV ref, which is hardly a better system anyway.
Ted | 08.05.22 - 11:55 a.m. | #
|
The pink ballot paper mentioned above does *not* enable the vote to count in the regular process. It's known as a "tendered ballot" and goes in an envelope. It is only counted if the election result is legally challenged and the election court orders it opened as part of a new count.
Having been an election agent (a candidate's legal manager) many times over the last decade I've never felt the official statistics on personation are meaningful. Personation requires a second person to turn up and claim the same vote *and* make a formal complaint *and* uphold it, often in the face of official indifference. In Tower Hamlets for years many repeatedly raised concerns about a wide variety of alleged electoral fraud and struggled to get the authorities to take it seriously until events in 2014 brought it to much wider attention. Official statistics for personation are even worse than using only convictions to measure levels of shoplifting.
(Indeed a lot of the drive to get the Conservative Party to adopt & implement a policy of voter ID has come from strong campaigning by the Tower Hamlets Conservatives over a good many years. They have been driven entirely by their experience on the ground.)
As barbicanman notes voter ID is commonplace in many other countries regardless of whether or not they have government ID cards - Ireland is the nearest such case. It is odd how often we hear of what other European countries do with their voting system given as a blanket reason why we should have PR yet many of the same people look across the Atlantic instead of the Irish Sea & the Channel when it comes to voter ID.
As for the mayoral and PCC voting system, the high number of spoilt papers caused by it is shocking. On Friday at the Newham count it was depressing seeing the large number of spoils for our mayoral election, due to this system confusing voters.
Tim Roll-Pickering | 08.05.22 - 12:18 p.m. | #
|
barbicanman - the present system makes it possible to at least register an offence, if not catch the person. I assume these offences are still registered.
If someone visits a polling station before I do, impersonating me, when I go to vote the supervisor on duty will know that something is amiss and should rightly inform the police. Likewise if I vote first then the impersonator will be caught red handed. Of course if I don't bother voting the impersonator will likely get away with it, but how many times on polling day would they be willing to risk this?
James | 08.05.22 - 12:22 p.m. | #
|
|
I voted until 2019 (after which my country's ruling regime effectively ended all meaningful elections by disqualifying and jailing whoever opposing them), and every time a photo ID was required. Admittedly I don't understand why asking for photo ID is seen as a conservative coup in both the UK and the US.
Patrickov | 08.05.22 - 1:16 p.m. | #
|
Colin says the Left are fighting over-whelmingly biased media. But the Right complain about the lefty BBC. Who can assess these weirdly incompatible beliefs?
Anyway I'm with Man of Kent. Since we signed up for postal votes for an election scheduled while we were abroad, it's been simpler to use it at every election since.
Ian | 08.05.22 - 1:51 p.m. | #
|
Agree with postal votes.
I can't imagine why anyone would choose to make time on a specific day, between specific hours, to go somewhere to put an X in a box when they could do it at any time of their choosing in the week or so beforehand from the comfort of their home and pop it in the post box (or get their mum to!) the next time they are passing!
If it wasn't for postal voting my young adults wouldn't bother at all.
Cornish Cockney | 08.05.22 - 2:13 p.m. | #
|
The Elections Bill also makes changes to postal voting including…
• “A maximum period of three years on voters’ application to hold a postal vote. Voters would need to re-apply at the end of that time.”
diamond geezer | Homepage | 08.05.22 - 2:23 p.m. | #
|
|
I returned my postal vote in person at the polling station. Best of both worlds...
commonliner | 08.05.22 - 4:06 p.m. | #
|
|
The problem of corruption is probably hidden in plain sight. Some of the number of registered voters at single addresses in Tower Hamlets were mind boggling.
scrumpy | 08.05.22 - 4:38 p.m. | #
|
|
I'm not sure the new voter identification rules won’t apply also to parish councils. The power to adapt parliamentary election rules for English local elections applies to parish and non-parish councils alike, albeit in practice slightly different administrative rules are made for principal councils versus parishes but voting is essentially the same for each, and there seems to be nothing in the new Act and the accompanying hoopla stating that parishes will be exempted. Indeed, parish elections are often combined with other local or national elections, so it would be awkward if a voter had conflicting identity requirements when otherwise entitled to more than one ballot paper at the same time.
Rich G | Homepage | 08.05.22 - 9:30 p.m. | #
|
|
If New Labour had been successful, we would all have been issued with ID cards, thus solving the problem of individuals not having photo ID
Mikey C | 08.05.22 - 11:00 p.m. | #
|
"FPTP...also what we’re used to in this country" - significant parts of the country are used to proportional representation, too.
"I wouldn’t be so certain it’ll give Conservatives an advantage" - maybe not, but it certainly gives the large parties a great advantage. Look at how a long way short of a voting majority gives a significant parliamentary majority, degrading the value of the majority of votes.
In NZ, some years ago we changed the parliamentary system to PR, and it's been a major change for the better, giving more representative and more diverse governments. Once people understand it it causes little confusion and few spoilt ballots (I speak as a former Returning Officer). Combined with PR in most local elections, it makes for much better democracy.
Betterbee | 08.05.22 - 11:52 p.m. | #
|
Following the postal vote changes link:
"Our public opinion research shows that people continue to have less confidence in the safety of postal voting, compared to polling station voting. 68% believe postal voting is secure, compared with 90% of people who feel voting in a polling station is secure."
If 90% already believe voting is secure, bringing in voter Id is targeting the wrong area!
Cornish Cockney | 09.05.22 - 12:07 a.m. | #
|
I voted twice in the same election... but not fraudulently.
It was a proxy vote for a son who was overseas.
My vote went one way - and he wanted me to cast his vote the other way. Only I know where "his" X went on the ballot paper!
slowloris | 09.05.22 - 10:57 a.m. | #
|
|
I recall reading that FPTP will not come in for London Assembly. As that would not be to the tory advantage
Sinners | 09.05.22 - 3:06 p.m. | #
|
The simplest PR vote seems to be asking people to put the candidates in order, '1', '2', '3'.
- only one box per candidate, so no confusion over multiple columns, or multiple sheets
- most countries share the numbering system
- no issue with also supporting a single X in place of '1'
- easy to explain quickly when you give the paper to the voter
The aim should be to get a single candidate with over 50% of the vote, by eliminating (in rounds) the worst result each time and reallocating their vote. If they have no further votes, their vote is then excluded (to allow 50% to be hit, eventually)
FPTP is hardly less complex than this for the voter, although counting is simpler.
The big question is whether PR should be within-constituency (for a general election), or an overall figure over the country (fine for a presidential system, difficult for the UK). Within constituency would still allow border gerrymandering.
Sykobee | 09.05.22 - 3:19 p.m. | #
|
|
Nothing can save the Conservatives now.
Michael | 09.05.22 - 10:49 p.m. | #
|
|
In NZ PR is country-wide but based on constituencies, so boundaries matter at local level but still give a proportional national result. Gerrymandering is not possible, and the system is pretty easy to use and works well. You don't meet many people who want to go back to FPTP, with its distortions and inherent unfairness.
Betterbee | Homepage | 10.05.22 - 12:39 a.m. | #
|
|
That's right, MMP is a perfect system -- you can vote for your local representative, and then vote for the party itself. When it was brought in it instantly allowed newer and smaller parties to have a chance, and allows the loonier wings of bigger parties to safely break off without splitting the vote.
Michael | 10.05.22 - 12:49 a.m. | #
|
The naked cynicism and the clear political nature of these new rules are plain to see. Firstly if you were really to stamp out the (perceived) risk of widespread electoral fraud, postal votes would be the greatest concern as they offer the most realistic opportunity to amplify an attempt to fraudulently influence an election (in person voter impersonation does not and would require many people to co-ordinate on the day of the election as only a finite number of polling stations in each constituency/area with a higher risk of being discovered vs postal).
Secondly the inclusion of bus passes which most pensioners have but not alternative forms of identification (both photo & non photo) is evidence these measures are clearly skewed to impact younger voters more.
Of course the reason both of these seemingly evident conclusions are being passed over is because the average Conservative voter is more likely to use a postal vote and have ID, the equivalent Labour voter not so much ...
Braemar | 10.05.22 - 9:41 a.m. | #
|
|
|
TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy
|