As the Guardian has reported this morning:
Controversial rules governing voter identification led to racial and disability discrimination at this year's local elections in England, according to a damning report co-written by one of the former ministers responsible for introducing them.
MPs and peers on the all-party parliamentary group on democracy and the constitution will publish a report on Monday saying that the rules caused more harm than they prevented when they came into force in May, and will call for changes, including the acceptance of a greater range of ID documents.
They note that:
The report, which has been seen by the Guardian, says: “The current voter-ID system is, as it stands, a ‘poisoned cure' in that it disenfranchises more electors than it protects.”
Crucially they note:
The authors found that “polling clerks are more likely to fail to compare a photo ID to the person presenting that document if the person is of a different ethnicity”.
They also highlighted the case of Andrea Barratt, who is immunocompromised and was blocked from entering a polling booth after refusing to remove her mask for an identification check.
And they added:
Anecdotal evidence in the all-party group report suggested some people may have been unfairly treated because of their race.
It says: “A disproportionate number of electors who were not permitted to vote appeared to be non-white passing. By contrast, all of those who were observed being permitted to vote without presenting ID were white-passing.”
While there is no evidence this changed the outcome of the local elections, the APPG report warns that if repeated at a general election, it could help swing the result of up to 16 constituencies.
I apologise to the Guardian for the length of the quotes from their (much longer) report, but this is a vital issue - and key to the future of democracy.
If, as seems very likely, the right to vote is now being removed from some people on the grounds of race and disability (as well as on the basis of income, which we already know restricts access to voter ID), then the pretence that we are a democracy is very hollow.
There appeared to be no Labour comment on this report in the Guardian article.
Will there be one, plus a promise for the wholesale electoral reform that we will need to ensure that this country can maintain its claim to be a democracy? I am not holding my breath, even though the party has apparently appointed a shadow minister for democracy. On current form, an excuse for inaction is bound to be found.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
If one looks at the US where gerrymandering, closure of voting sites in black areas and voter intimidation is rife we can see where this is going.
Labour has made it very clear it doesn’t want left wing or BAME voters so I can’t see that trajectory changing any time soon.
This is deeply concerning and worrying.
The question always needs to be asked: Why do the Tories feel they need to do this?
The answer is: The Tories are (deep down) scared – the only age cohorts that are voting for them in solid majorities are the over 55’s. Under 55 and voting Tory gets progressively smaller as the age gets younger. The Tories are scared, and need voter supression (of all kinds).
Happily, it did them really well in the recent local elections!
It always seemed to me that this anti-democratic legislation was a thinly-disguised Conservative attempt to disenfranchise voters more likely to vote for other parties, and wholly disproportionate to tackling the tiny amount of election fraud in the UK. And, like the so-called “culture wars”, copied from the Republicans in the US.
Another reminder, if it is needed, that democracy is fragile and needs defending, and that things do not always get better.
“Controversial rules governing voter identification led to racial and disability discrimination at this year’s local elections in England, according to a damning report co-written by one of the former ministers responsible for introducing them.”
&
Tory MP regrets supporting the elimination of legal aid – after spending a fortune defending himself when on trial for murder (he was found not guilty).
&
The tory imbecile Dale (LBC broadcaster) supported “no-staff-at-railway-stations” – until he was temporarily disabled – then he did.
There is a pattern of “buyers regret” or rather polit-sicko regret – advised against a course of action, they do it anyway & then discover that the advice was correct. Having functioning empathy (& some common sense) would avoid such nonsense. The vile-tories treat the UK & its serfs as somewhere to undertake their funny experiments in econometrics & democracy. Ah well, they will soon be replaced by vile-tory lite, same policies, different faces.
Apart from the blatant Gerrymandering, instances like these always offer an insight into the Tory view of Human nature.
In this case the view that, we cheat for personal advantage so everybody else must behave like that.
They have been like this at least since Tory Prime Minister in the 19th Century Lord Salisbury, who as the country progressed towards universal suffrage thought that the Tories were doomed on the grounds that the first thing that would happen is that the new voters would demand changes in the law that removed the privileges of the rich and fairly redistributed their wealth.
He was, and I remain, amazed that it has never happened, because it turned out so easy to mislead and distract enough of the new voters.
Only really been a ‘democracy’ for nearly 100 years! Perhaps we’re going backwards (who would have thought…)
6 February 1918: The Representation of the People Act of 1918 enfranchised women over the age of 30 who were either a member or married to a member of the Local Government Register. About 8.4 million women gained the vote.
21 November 1918: the Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act 1918 was passed, allowing women to be elected to Parliament.
1928: Women in England, Wales and Scotland received the vote on the same terms as men (over the age of 21) as a result of the Representation of the People Act 1928.
The Tories are following the US Republicans, who make it extremely difficult for in particular Black voters to meet the ” registration requirements”.
During the last Presidential elections, Stacey Abrams ( Democrat) ran a very successful campaign in Georgia to get people registered to vote. These votes were crucial to Georgia voting for Biden.
Naively I thought that Labour would be in touch with her to pick her skills and run a similar campaign in the UK.
Of course wishful thinking.
So far I have not heard Labour state that they would abolish this law or any of the other laws limiting the right to protest.
The labour party has disenfranchised 1/3rd of its membership, by removing membership from individuals on spurious grounds and whole CLPs for similar reasons.
Will it copy this method when in power?
“It is worth saying that in difficult circumstances, left comrades used the very limited platform and process to fight for workers’ rights, against NHS privatisation, for investment in universal public services including free schools meals, against student fees and for civil liberties and repeal of the Tories’ most reactionary recent legislation such as the illegal migration act, the recent public order act curtailing protest and the introduction of voter ID. ”
From the latest National Policy Forum Report.
“Instead of relying on individuals to register individually, citizens would be automatically registered when they apply for things like a drivers’ licence, passport, or benefits. People would be able to opt out if they choose.”
More obvious would be paying council tax. If renting and paying through the landlord, it would be up to the landlord to list those living in his/her properties.
Many democracies in Europe have automatic registration of voters.
There is a powerful case for it.
https://unlockdemocracy.org.uk/automatic-voter-registration
Our democracy is a bit of a sham anyway in my view.
So, working out what this adds or takes away is somewhat difficult.
Rees Mogg as I recall let the cat out the bag not so long ago.
My conclusion is that those who have introduced these measures are simply helping to strangle any sense of a resurgence in interest in politics as a result of Tory misrule, to deny those most hurt by them a voice.
Hopefully Labour means what it says when it talks of lowering the voting age?
The Polity data series classifies and scores countries on their Democracy score and their Autocracy score to give a Polity IV score and Polity IV regime type..
A score of 10 is a Full Democracy; a score of 6 to 9 is a Democracy; 1 to 5 is an Open Anocracy; -5 to 0 is a closed Anocracy; -10 to -6 is an Autocracy.
Anocracy is a semi-democracy or part democracy and part dictatorship.
Currently, the U. K. is classified as a democracy with a score of 8, as is the U. S. A. Ireland scores 10 and so is a full democracy as are the Netherlands and Germany.
Both Russia and Ukraine are classified as Open Anocracies, with respective sores of 4 and 4.
So, according to this classification system we are a second rate democracy, which, personally, feels about right.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polity_data_series
Might this differentiation of “Regime Type” offer a useful guide for the much needed improvement of our “Democracy” into a “Full Democracy?
No. Dictatorship-Lite is a fairer description of what we have in the UK.