The Labour MP for Brighton Kemptown accused the government of using “voter ID” to try to cling to power at the next general election.
In a late-night debate in the House of Commons last night (Monday 12 December) Lloyd Russell-Moyle said that the government was trying to exclude voters in marginal seats.
He said: “Six per cent of people according to the Government’s own data say that they’ll be less likely to vote according to this.
“Now what is 6 per cent in each constituency? About 3,000 voters – 3,000 voters in every constituency.
“Now there are about 40 constituencies in this country that have a majority less than 4,000.
“Forty Conservative constituencies that might hold on a bit longer and mean that they cling on to power despite the popular will.”
Voter ID was authorised by the Elections Act 2022, which would require photo identification for in-person voting in Great Britain for the first time. The Act received royal assent in April.
But the government only put forward the necessary secondary legislation to work out the details of the reforms this week.
MPs voted 298 to 199 – a majority of 99 – in favour of approving the regulations last night.
And the debate was not without acrimony, with the Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner describing the plans as “backwards, unworkable and anti-democratic”.
According to the division list, Conservative former cabinet minister David Davis, who has in the past spoken against the government’s plans for voter ID, voted against the regulations.
It comes after the Electoral Commission, Britain’s election watchdog, warned of possible problems when the voter ID system is introduced at next May’s local elections because of Government delays in putting forward the statutory instrument (SI).
Ailsa Irvine, director of electoral administration at the Electoral Commission, told the Financial Times that the organisation was committed to supporting the implementation of voter ID.
But she added: “The timetable before next May’s elections remains tight. The requirement must be delivered in a way which is accessible, secure and workable.”
Why are Labour, Greens, and Liberal Democrats so against voter ID checks when must of Europe require it already?
https://www.nccivitas.org/civitas-review/fact-check-international-voter-id-laws/
ID cards are issued as standard within the EEA – so the comparison isn’t really useful.
It was the Tories that scrapped Labour’s planned biometric ID and mandatory DNA database plans. Dystopian Labour..
Voter ID should be a no brainer. It is mad that someone can just turn up, say an address, and then vote.
That’s because they cannot just turn up, say an address, and then vote. Have you voted before? I recommend it.
Do what the Americans do – no national ID card – but you can have a “non-driving” driving licence…
Do you mean a provisional driving licence?
Voter fraud is disappearingly small in this country as it is in the US. However the right have long seen restricting voter registration as a way to discourage the poor from voting.
Some states in the US use all sorts of restrictions to disenfranchise the poor and black.
It doesn’t even have to be photoID. So long as there is some proof that the person turning up to vote actually lives at the address they are claiming. The fact that no proof at all is required is crazy.
Get rid of postal votes, that’s where the real fraud exists especially in multi generational patriarchic households in Leicester, Leeds and Bradford. Also stop the Green Party rocking up at student blocks on election day and getting half cut students to sign pre filled out voter proxy forms. Naughty, I caught you and reported you to the electoral commission. Caroline had to do a lot of begging that day.
Oh, I very much disagree with the removal of postal votes. There are plenty of people who cannot attend a polling station for a variety of reasons such as shift work, poor health, or logistics.
And your personification of students just shows how little you actually know about students, as they tend to be one of the most politically engaged people.
it’s easier than that – get rid of attention seeking people trying to get an itinerary