More than 400,000 people may have been prevented from voting in the general election because they lacked the necessary ID, with those from minority ethnic communities more than twice as likely to have experienced this, polling has suggested.

Of those surveyed by More In Common, 3.2% said they were turned away at least once last Thursday, which if reflected across the UK would equate to more than 850,000 people. Of these, more than half said they either did not return or came back and were still unable to vote.

Among people turned away at least once, about a third had ID that was not on the relatively narrow list of permitted documents; about a quarter said the name on their ID was different to that on the electoral register; and 12% said they were told the picture on the ID did not match their appearance.

The poll of more than 2,000 people across Great Britain, coordinated by the campaign group Hope Not Hate, also indicated that the voter ID rules, used last week for the first time at a general election, disproportionately affected minority ethnic people.

It found that 6.5% of voters of colour were turned away from a polling booth at least once, compared with 2.5% of white voters.

The rule that voters must show photo ID was introduced by the Conservative government as part of its 2022 Elections Act, despite minimal evidence that in-person voter fraud was a significant problem.

Another potential issue is people deciding not to vote, or even register to vote, because they know they lack ID. The polling found that 6% of people said the ID requirements had affected their decision on whether or not to vote and that they then did not vote, which if reflected nationally could mean up to 2.8 million people not voting when they might otherwise have done.

  • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Would not put anything past the Tories.

    But the more logical answer is who is responsible for checking the identity when ID is created. All ID accepted is created by national or local government. Whereas student ID is created by universities or small colleges. With no government authority in the identification. It is hardly an equal comparison.

    Honestly, the whole ID thing is crap. Its fixing an issue that doesn’t exist. But it’s hard to argue rejecting IDs not issued by government is an act of predudice.

      • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        60 plus oyster is issued by local gov. Just like disabled bus passes and elderly bus passes else where in the nation. They have the same ID check as any other local auth ID.

        Student ones do not.

        To make the claim, it is intentional. You need a closer comparison.

        IE sopmething that has the same agencies doing the same ID check.

        • warm@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          And you really don’t think they considered this? They knew what they were doing.

          • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            Not really. Given, student IDs are given to many foreigners. That is far more likely the reason it was excluded.

            But s I say student ID and oyster cards in general are not issued by an authority the gov has control over. So as far as those fighting for it are concerned. Allowing such is freaking pointless As they are not government ID and as such the gov has no say or involvement in the process.

            Elderly and disabled bus passes driving licences passports and new voter ID are ll legal requirement issued under alimentary laws. Elderly oyster cards are just the method London uses to issue elderly bus passes.

            As I keep saying, voter ID is a freaking stupid idea fixing an issue that does not exist.

            But adding student ID or student issued bus passes would take extra laws. IE actually taking over the rules of how uni’s, colleges and private bus companies issue those IDs. Whereas the approved IDs including elderly oyster cards are already under those laws.

            As much as I would not put it past Tories to use anything to limit voters they don’t like. Forcing Uni’s colleges and private companies to follow rules on the issuance of IDs that have zero other legal value or purpose. It would likely piss more Tory funders off while costing the government a freaking fortune to implement.

            I hate giving Tories credit for anything. But there are simply more logical reasons for this than the conspiracy involved.

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      In Northern Ireland we were always able to send a photocopy of a Student ID to the Electoral Office, they’d check with your school/college and send you a valid “Electoral card” back. Not sure if England had this system in place.

      • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not sure if England had this system in place.

        Nope. And given it takes actions from the government department. The Tories, and likely now not current labour, would not consider it efficient.

        Tends to be considered down to the applicant to provide the proof. Not the government to go looking.

        But also having worked for small colleges. The only concern they have is will they be paid. So confirming the ID beyond the money source/ Yep, honestly the gov would not trust them. Nor should they. It has been reported, and I have seen small colleges offer training as a way to simplify the visa process. Did not bother me (and was other colleges, not the one I worked with) as I think immigration fears are over played.

        But those that think voter ID is needed. Def would not trust these organisations.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          You have to send a passport-style photograph and the photocopy, so I think it would be easy enough for the college to see “yes, this person is who they are and in our systems” and obviously the electoral register has its own systems for registration and checking as well, that any large scale election tampering this way would be ineffective.

          Also, the previous system was no ID at all, so I still think a college verifying an ID is trustworthy enough. You could probably pass with a fake ID into voting if you really must fake one. And it’s probably easier than bribing a college.

          • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            except if you list the IDs allowed. Bus passes issued by local auth. (actually made by one company local auth just do confirmation) Driving licence and passport. Plus new local auth confirmed election ID that I assume has the same.

            They all have government approved digital NFC chips to confirm them.

            As I say, I think the whole need for voter ID is crap. It is fixing an issue that does not exist. But the claim fakes can be easy to pass. It is at best a short term one due to lack of effort on the Tories part. It seems very likely this and control of the issuance of the IDs is exactly why the government chose the IDs they did. Student IDs are more often than not just laminated cards. And where some UNIS choose to use NFC. Nothing forces them to a standard. Nor are the Tories interested in forcing Uni’s to do so.

            There are many reasons why the gov would not want UNIS and small colleges to be involved. Bribes are certainly an option. But honestly, the simple fact that the Uni loses out by saying no. So, has absolutely no fiscal reason to do complete checks.

            Unlike national and local government, accepting student is the only way higher education makes money. Checking those students will pass (as for nvq level, that is often the only way money is made) is the only work many colleges care about. Who you really are s not a huge concern.

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Since when did driving licences have NFC chips? They just looked at my licence, ticked me off and handed me my ballot paper.

    • Theoriginalthon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      But who is going to go through the process of obtaining a student ID just to commit voting fraud. Even if they are rotating the person checking the ID once an hour, eventually they will be recognised or get to a point where the person they are impersonating has already voted, all for what 10? 15? extra votes

      • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Agreed. But that is an argument for no IDs.

        IF iDs are used. Well I know some colleges are more willing to avoid checks then others.

        As I say it fixing an issue that fomat exist. The numbers of voter fraud are insanely low. Because there really are few occasions where it is viable.

        But the point on student ID is based on a government claiming it is and voters who believe them.

        The government has no rules at all about the issuance of student ID. Heck I can legally set up a college training folks to be penguins cross humans. And issue IDs to my students. Assuming anyone is dumb enough to sign up.