More than 2m voters may lack photo ID required under new UK bill

[Silver]

More than 2 million UK voters could lack the necessary ID to take part in future elections, according to a government analysis of its flagship bill on voting rights, spurring warnings that “decades of democratic progress” risk going into reverse.

The plan for mandatory photo ID at elections – a central element of Tuesday’s Queen’s speech – risks disproportionately hitting older, disabled and homeless voters who are less likely to have such documents, critics said. US civil rights groups have warned it amounts to Republican-style voter suppression.

More than 2m voters may lack photo ID required under new UK bill | Queen's speech | The Guardian

Edited May 11, 2021 by ted hughes

[gwa125]

Care to elaborate more on who doesn’t have photo ID these days?  All current drivers licences are normally photo ID, as well as passports, over 60’s bus passes (my dad has one), CSCS cards (i have one) if your involved in construction (as are a lot of the immigrant population. My neighbours are Bulgarians, have them, and are a right laugh).
 

And, as we are a democracy, why not put the bill to a referendum? Obviously you don’t want that because you know how it will result. That means there would be no dodgy mail in votes. 
 

Bonus: as lockdown is ending ted and you are supposedly from Kent like me, when are we going for that beer (or cider), let’s have a proper debate. 

[Dreamer screamer]

Quote

More than 2 million UK voters could lack the necessary ID to take part in future elections

The humanity         (sniggers) 

[rashore]

19 minutes ago, gwa125 said:

Care to elaborate more on who doesn’t have photo ID these days?  All current drivers licences are normally photo ID, as well as passports, over 60’s bus passes (my dad has one), CSCS cards (i have one) if your involved in construction (as are a lot of the immigrant population. My neighbours are Bulgarians, have them, and are a right laugh).
 

And, as we are a democracy, why not put the bill to a referendum? Obviously you don’t want that because you know how it will result. That means there would be no dodgy mail in votes. 
 

Bonus: as lockdown is ending ted and you are supposedly from Kent like me, when are we going for that beer (or cider), let’s have a proper debate. 

There's a couple paragraphs in the article about who does not have photo ID, and a link to the study that goes into detail about it. You might have missed it, so here's the study: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984918/Photographic_ID_research-_headline_findings_report.pdf

There's a couple other links in the article that have more information as well. 

I don't live out that way- is it common for bills like this to be put to public referendum? Or something that parliament typically handles? The article said there were over two dozen bills proposed- should those be put to public as well, or handled by parliament, or it would depend on the bill how it should be handled? What's the law on this?

[L.A.T.1961]

I am not against the idea but life does seem to get a bit more complicated every day. 

I spent nearly an hour at the weekend attempting to get a pension forecast from the gov. on line, site. 

Despite opening an account with them and receiving my official number, then giving Nat ins number, name, DOB, address, I was still unable to retrieve my own details.

Extra info needed was a passport number, my last one expired about three years ago, or recent phone contract details and I have a pay as you go phone. 

 

[Silver]

1 hour ago, gwa125 said:

Care to elaborate more on who doesn’t have photo ID these days?  All current drivers licences are normally photo ID, as well as passports, over 60’s bus passes (my dad has one), CSCS cards (i have one) if your involved in construction (as are a lot of the immigrant population. My neighbours are Bulgarians, have them, and are a right laugh).
 

And, as we are a democracy, why not put the bill to a referendum? Obviously you don’t want that because you know how it will result. That means there would be no dodgy mail in votes. 
 

Bonus: as lockdown is ending ted and you are supposedly from Kent like me, when are we going for that beer (or cider), let’s have a proper debate. 

Obviously you didn't bother to read the article. And I didn't write the criticism, it comes from a department of the government itself:

*snip*

 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Saru
Please avoid copy and pasting large amounts of material from external sources, thank you.

[Silver]

37 minutes ago, rashore said:

There's a couple paragraphs in the article about who does not have photo ID, and a link to the study that goes into detail about it. You might have missed it, so here's the study: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984918/Photographic_ID_research-_headline_findings_report.pdf

There's a couple other links in the article that have more information as well. 

I don't live out that way- is it common for bills like this to be put to public referendum? Or something that parliament typically handles? The article said there were over two dozen bills proposed- should those be put to public as well, or handled by parliament, or it would depend on the bill how it should be handled? What's the law on this?

What an interesting question!

The Queens speech is part of the formal opening of a parliamentary session, in which she puts forward the intended business of the government in power, the new laws they intend to pass.

It is not a referendum, the public has no say, and is often accepted without question. But it is debated in the House of Commons and the Lords and amendments can be demanded. At least on one occasion a government was forced out of office as it was too unacceptable.

Here's the official write-up on it: Queen’s Speech | The Institute for Government

Edited May 11, 2021 by ted hughes

[Silver]

1 hour ago, gwa125 said:

Care to elaborate more on who doesn’t have photo ID these days?  All current drivers licences are normally photo ID, as well as passports, over 60’s bus passes (my dad has one), CSCS cards (i have one) if your involved in construction (as are a lot of the immigrant population. My neighbours are Bulgarians, have them, and are a right laugh).
 

And, as we are a democracy, why not put the bill to a referendum? Obviously you don’t want that because you know how it will result. That means there would be no dodgy mail in votes. 
 

Bonus: as lockdown is ending ted and you are supposedly from Kent like me, when are we going for that beer (or cider), let’s have a proper debate. 

Are you the poster who claimed that the fact you were doing building work in a hospital that week meant that the Tory government was going to honour it's commitment to build forty new hospitals? Nah, doubt if a debate would be possible.

[rashore]

40 minutes ago, ted hughes said:

What an interesting question!

The Queens speech is part of the formal opening of a parliamentary session, in which she puts forward the intended business of the government in power, the new laws they intend to pass.

It is not a referendum, the public has no say, and is often accepted without question. But it is debated in the House of Commons and the Lords and amendments can be demanded. At least on one occasion a government was forced out of office as it was too unacceptable.

Here's the official write-up on it: Queen’s Speech | The Institute for Government

So, in American, heh. And no, the U.S. does not do this... but would the Queens speech and the opening of Houses of Commons and Lords be akin to if the U.S. had a policy of the President putting forward (announcing?) a couple dozen bills to be discussed by the House and Senate in a formal opening of the years Legislative branch?

Where do the bills come from to be presented? 

[gwa125]

9 hours ago, ted hughes said:

Are you the poster who claimed that the fact you were doing building work in a hospital that week meant that the Tory government was going to honour it's commitment to build forty new hospitals? Nah, doubt if a debate would be possible.

Yep that’s me. And I didn’t say the gov. Would honour its commitment to whatever. All I said was that I was working at hospital where they are doing loads of work. And I know of another hospital in Kent that is being done. If you were from here, you could easily walk in and have a look yourself, but that would make the debate end I suppose. 
 

[Silver]

1 minute ago, gwa125 said:

Yep that’s me. And I didn’t say the gov. Would honour its commitment to whatever. All I said was that I was working at hospital where they are doing loads of work. And I know of another hospital in Kent that is being done. If you were from here, you could easily walk in and have a look yourself, but that would make the debate end I suppose. 
 

As far as I can recall, you ended the debate. You said something along the lines of "the government must be honouring it's commitment to build more hospitals because it is doing lots of maintenance work (on existing ones).

I'll look it up later. If I am wrong, I promise I will apologise.

 

 

[gwa125]

10 hours ago, rashore said:

There's a couple paragraphs in the article about who does not have photo ID, and a link to the study that goes into detail about it. You might have missed it, so here's the study: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984918/Photographic_ID_research-_headline_findings_report.pdf

There's a couple other links in the article that have more information as well. 

I don't live out that way- is it common for bills like this to be put to public referendum? Or something that parliament typically handles? The article said there were over two dozen bills proposed- should those be put to public as well, or handled by parliament, or it would depend on the bill how it should be handled? What's the law on this?

Thanks. I didn’t read it. I’ve just read the first page and it states that those that don’t have a form of acceptable ID can apply for a free voter card. In theory then, everyone should be able to get one. And Northern Ireland does this already. Will have a proper look thru later. 
 

As for referendums, not sure on the law on this. Usually used on the big decisions (like leaving EU). I suppose it’s where you leave those elected to make the decisions. I only said it because it would see how much support there is for, and against it. 

[Silver]

59 minutes ago, gwa125 said:

Yep that’s me. And I didn’t say the gov. Would honour its commitment to whatever. All I said was that I was working at hospital where they are doing loads of work. And I know of another hospital in Kent that is being done. If you were from here, you could easily walk in and have a look yourself, but that would make the debate end I suppose. 
 

Found it:

During the 2019 election, Johnson said the government was building 40 new hospitals, that it recruited 20,000 extra police officers, that Labour’s spending plans had been costed at £1.2 trillion, that Jeremy Corbyn opposed home ownership and wanted to abolish Britain’s armed forces. Each statement was a lie.

Johnson visited a hospital and told the doctors he had given up drink, the day after he was photographed drinking whisky in a distillery, and the day before he was photographed drinking beer in a brewery. This gained him nothing. Natural liars often can’t break the habit.

Brexit of course is built upon lies, and Johnson’s were the most egregious. Everyone knows about the NHS’s extra £350 million a week, which even Nigel Farage blanched at – it’s become such a cliché that one forgets how cruel a deception it was.

gwa125: Well they must be spending a bit of money on the NHS because my local hospital is getting a load of it’s  floors replaced, which is a couple of years work, and I know it will be costing some serious money as I used to price up work at my previous company. 
 

 And as one of the floorlayer’s doing some the work, 5 minutes from home, I couldn’t be happier. Off to work I go (at 4.30am, can’t sleep).

•  

Edited May 12, 2021 by ted hughes

[itsnotoutthere]

"More than 2 million UK voters could lack the necessary ID to take part in future elections"

I think that's about 2.8% of the population. That's no big deal, according to Ozymandias only 30% of the population vote anyway.

But seriously the attached report talks about 'free voter id cards' ...so where's the problem?

What problems have they had in Ireland?

Edited May 12, 2021 by itsnotoutthere

[gwa125]

5 hours ago, ted hughes said:

Found it:

During the 2019 election, Johnson said the government was building 40 new hospitals, that it recruited 20,000 extra police officers, that Labour’s spending plans had been costed at £1.2 trillion, that Jeremy Corbyn opposed home ownership and wanted to abolish Britain’s armed forces. Each statement was a lie.

Johnson visited a hospital and told the doctors he had given up drink, the day after he was photographed drinking whisky in a distillery, and the day before he was photographed drinking beer in a brewery. This gained him nothing. Natural liars often can’t break the habit.

Brexit of course is built upon lies, and Johnson’s were the most egregious. Everyone knows about the NHS’s extra £350 million a week, which even Nigel Farage blanched at – it’s become such a cliché that one forgets how cruel a deception it was.

gwa125: Well they must be spending a bit of money on the NHS because my local hospital is getting a load of it’s  floors replaced, which is a couple of years work, and I know it will be costing some serious money as I used to price up work at my previous company. 
 

 And as one of the floorlayer’s doing some the work, 5 minutes from home, I couldn’t be happier. Off to work I go (at 4.30am, can’t sleep).

•  

So where do I say that they were spending the total amount you claimed? I said they are spending a bit of money. I’m sure I said somewhere that it would be a bit of money because pricing up jobs was my main task at my last company. And going by the amount of meterage, it’s a chunk of money. That’s just the flooring. And it wasn’t just any cheap flooring either. Think about all the electrics (new lights), hvac, and all the other new stuff being put in. 
 

like I said, as you are in Kent so you say, it can’t be hard to pop your head in to any hospital in the county and have a look with your own eyes. Gotta be easier surely, if you don’t trust other peoples word. 

[Silver]

1 hour ago, gwa125 said:

So where do I say that they were spending the total amount you claimed? I said they are spending a bit of money. I’m sure I said somewhere that it would be a bit of money because pricing up jobs was my main task at my last company. And going by the amount of meterage, it’s a chunk of money. That’s just the flooring. And it wasn’t just any cheap flooring either. Think about all the electrics (new lights), hvac, and all the other new stuff being put in. 
 

like I said, as you are in Kent so you say, it can’t be hard to pop your head in to any hospital in the county and have a look with your own eyes. Gotta be easier surely, if you don’t trust other peoples word. 

Kent  or Australia 

[gwa125]

Do I have to quote where you said you were from Kent in our previous interaction? And was it not proven in another thread by Saru that you have been posting from the UK after they asked your permission? 
 

So if you are UK based, go into a hospital (Medway, Canterbury and William Harvey-Ashford for your reference to ones I’ve been working on) and look to see work going on. Easy. Or, if your from somewhere else, then obviously a bit of lying and subterfuge on your part then about where you are posting from. 
 

which is it?

[rashore]

6 minutes ago, gwa125 said:

Do I have to quote where you said you were from Kent in our previous interaction? And was it not proven in another thread by Saru that you have been posting from the UK after they asked your permission? 
 

So if you are UK based, go into a hospital (Medway, Canterbury and William Harvey-Ashford for your reference to ones I’ve been working on) and look to see work going on. Easy. Or, if your from somewhere else, then obviously a bit of lying and subterfuge on your part then about where you are posting from. 
 

which is it?

Let's not get into cross-topic posting and warfare and rehashing personal scrutiny of other members please. Once in another thread was more than enough. 

[spartan max2]

Did the UK offer free photo IDs at the DMV and election centers?

When US states pass voter ID laws that typically something included. Being able to get free IDs.

[gwa125]

6 minutes ago, rashore said:

Let's not get into cross-topic posting and warfare and rehashing personal scrutiny of other members please. Once in another thread was more than enough. 

You’re right and I apologise. 

[itsnotoutthere]

23 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

Did the UK offer free photo IDs at the DMV and election centers?

When US states pass voter ID laws that typically something included. Being able to get free IDs.

Yes, free ID is included in the legislation. So really, this is a non-story. Only people that don't want to be identified have anything to worry about, and really...do you want them to vote?

Edited May 12, 2021 by itsnotoutthere

[Silver]

4 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

Did the UK offer free photo IDs at the DMV and election centers?

When US states pass voter ID laws that typically something included. Being able to get free IDs.

It is voter suppression. The intention is to make it more difficult to vote for voters unsympathetic to the Tories:

Boris Johnson’s voter ID proposals are nothing more than suppression under a different name

Introducing compulsory voter ID will disproportionately affect ethnic minorities, as well as younger people and those on low incomes. The bill will effectively disenfranchise more people than cases of voter fraud it will present.

During ten trials in 2019 in England, 1,968 people were turned away for not having appropriate identification. More 700 of those did not return to vote.

You don’t have to be a genius to work out that the people most likely to be affected here are the people least likely to vote Conservative. Electoral Integrity? Voter Suppression more like.

When Dominic Cummings left Downing Street many hoped that the culture war that he had gamed left with him. The Queen’s Speech suggests it is only just beginning. Boris Johnson’s voter ID proposals are nothing more than suppression under a different name (yahoo.com)

Edited May 12, 2021 by ted hughes

[itsnotoutthere]

Introducing compulsory voter ID will disproportionately affect ethnic minorities, as well as younger people and those on low incomes. ..........WHY?

Edited May 12, 2021 by itsnotoutthere

[itsnotoutthere]

Come on Ted, free photo ID is part of the proposed legislation..... so how will it disproportionately affect those groups you mention above? 

Edited May 12, 2021 by itsnotoutthere

[+Desertrat56]

On 5/11/2021 at 12:37 PM, ted hughes said:

More than 2 million UK voters could lack the necessary ID to take part in future elections, according to a government analysis of its flagship bill on voting rights, spurring warnings that “decades of democratic progress” risk going into reverse.

The plan for mandatory photo ID at elections – a central element of Tuesday’s Queen’s speech – risks disproportionately hitting older, disabled and homeless voters who are less likely to have such documents, critics said. US civil rights groups have warned it amounts to Republican-style voter suppression.

More than 2m voters may lack photo ID required under new UK bill | Queen's speech | The Guardian

I thought the UK was more "civilized" than to actually have registered voters who don't have an id.   Weird.