The next General Election....

[albion]

Rwanda is the only card the Tories are playing. That of course is that Brexit divided they promised.

 

[stowie]

Well exactly. Would those with less mainstream views be more motivated to vote if they knew they were definitely getting seats though? Whilst those apathetic under FPTP remained apathetic under PR?

Wouldn't UKIP have got 80 seats at their best GE showing? Enough to force a coalition or affect legislation perhaps.


I don't disagree but think we might have 10 years of less palatable mainstream groups in parliament before the electorate woke up and decided their vote really does count.

Instead we have had a Tory party with a large majority in HoP that is a hollowed out zombie beholden to its nuttier right-wing members or terrified of spectre of losing votes to UKIP/Reform since at least 2016 and almost certainly before that as well.

The whole Brexit thing was Cameron trying to put a lid on Euroscepticism in his own party with the concern that the ERGers might defect to UKIP if he didn't.

Arguably this country has been at least partly run vicariously by UKIP (or more accurately Farage) for the best part of a decade without Farage needing to win a seat or take any accountability at all. As with all these parties, when they realise they actually have power and responsibility, their rhetoric falls apart and they are exposed. Farage has had the luxury of being able to influence direction of travel and still not have to do anything more than snipe from the sidelines when it all goes wrong.

 

[spen666]

It's not up to me to list barriers you don't believe exist...

But here's one: the focus of parties on immigration. An article I read recently had that way down the list of things people actually care about. When the two main parties bang on about in constantly instead of things which affect people more directly, is it any wonder they can't be arsed to vote?

Shift focus from perceived and non existent threats to something that actually matters (education would be another, but the Lib Dems f*cked that royally, so it's no wonder they've fallen off a cliff).

That is not a barrier to voting
Not liking a party policy is not a barrier to voting. Anyone, whether young old disadvantaged or not can like or dislike a policy.


Like I say, you cannot even name one barrier to voting for the young or disadvantaged

 

[AndyRM]

That is not a barrier to voting
Not liking a party policy is not a barrier to voting. Anyone, whether young old disadvantaged or not can like or dislike a policy.


Like I say, you cannot even name one barrier to voting for the young or disadvantaged

No, you've missed my point. But that's hardly a surprise: policy is absolutely a barrier.

Voter ID, there's something more tangible for you to somehow dismiss.

 

[spen666]

No, you've missed my point. But that's hardly a surprise: policy is absolutely a barrier.

Voter ID, there's something more tangible for you to somehow dismiss.

No, I think you have missed the point.
Barriers to voting for the young and disadvantaged are not ylour subjective dislike of a policy. The whole point of a democracy is that we can all individually choose whether to vote for a party with a particular policy on immigration or not.

That is not a barrier to voting at all.

Voter ID -
I accept that could be a barrier, but that has also to be balanced against the reason for it being in place. I would personally far rather have rules in place to stop electoral fraud than there be no such preventative measures.

There are provisions in place for those who do not have for example a driving licence or passport to get the necessary voter ID - if the young or disadvantaged do not choose to avail themselves of these provisions, then again, its their choice not to put themselves in a position to enable them to vote.

If people choose not to engage with the rules on obtaining voter ID, then that is their choice. The rules do provide ways those without driving licences, passports etc can get voter id

 

[classic33]

Well, one wheeze this government introduced that definitely affects these groups disproportionately is the requirement for ID to vote. Looking through the list of acceptable ID, there is a bunch of various travel IDs which are accepted for over 60's, but nothing equivalent for anyone young. Both the young and disadvantaged are more likely not to have a passport or driving license (the main ID which will be used by those with them). This was introduced by the government to solve a problem that doesn't exist (or at least doesn't exist to the extent that makes any difference to the outcome of elections - especially national ones). I believe that it was introduced by this government specifically to exclude those who they preferred didn't vote, but I am a cynical soul.

The last local elections I saw seven turned away due to not having the appropriate/approved ID. But I still believe the problem it was supposed to address was manufactured.
After all if you're the landlord of a property, and you want an extra vote or two you simply ensure your tenants are registered and accompany them to the polling station, with the appropriate ID and paperwork with instructions on who to vote for.

An on the ball, and a not backing down approach from the presiding officer stopped anything from happening.

 

[AndyRM]

No, I think you have missed the point.
Barriers to voting for the young and disadvantaged are not ylour subjective dislike of a policy. The whole point of a democracy is that we can all individually choose whether to vote for a party with a particular policy on immigration or not.

That is not a barrier to voting at all.

Voter ID -
I accept that could be a barrier, but that has also to be balanced against the reason for it being in place. I would personally far rather have rules in place to stop electoral fraud than there be no such preventative measures.

There are provisions in place for those who do not have for example a driving licence or passport to get the necessary voter ID - if the young or disadvantaged do not choose to avail themselves of these provisions, then again, its their choice not to put themselves in a position to enable them to vote.

If people choose not to engage with the rules on obtaining voter ID, then that is their choice. The rules do provide ways those without driving licences, passports etc can get voter id

"None of these are worth voting for and because of the unpopularity of their policies they'll never get in here anyway."

A barrier.

Whatever, you do this in every debate. There's no point.

As you're doing with voter ID. Anything in the way of making something easier or more palatable is a barrier.

 

[classic33]

No, I think you have missed the point.
Barriers to voting for the young and disadvantaged are not ylour subjective dislike of a policy. The whole point of a democracy is that we can all individually choose whether to vote for a party with a particular policy on immigration or not.

That is not a barrier to voting at all.

Voter ID -
I accept that could be a barrier, but that has also to be balanced against the reason for it being in place. I would personally far rather have rules in place to stop electoral fraud than there be no such preventative measures.

There are provisions in place for those who do not have for example a driving licence or passport to get the necessary voter ID - if the young or disadvantaged do not choose to avail themselves of these provisions, then again, its their choice not to put themselves in a position to enable them to vote.

If people choose not to engage with the rules on obtaining voter ID, then that is their choice. The rules do provide ways those without driving licences, passports etc can get voter id

The list of officially issued ID(You'd to prove who you are to get the ID card. The main criteria chosen for ID selection), didn't include council cards, NHS issued cards or police ID cards. Not everyone with one of these is a police officer.

 

[classic33]

That is not a barrier to voting
Not liking a party policy is not a barrier to voting. Anyone, whether young old disadvantaged or not can like or dislike a policy.


Like I say, you cannot even name one barrier to voting for the young or disadvantaged

The Voter ID card introduced for the last elections. If you're going to insist that people apply for one, at least offer the means of application in paper form. Not just online applications.
The paper application form used this year may not be acceptable or available next year. Leaving digital applications as the only means of applying.
Digital exclusion.

 

[spen666]

"None of these are worth voting for and because of the unpopularity of their policies they'll never get in here anyway."

A barrier.

Whatever, you do this in every debate. There's no point.

As you're doing with voter ID. Anything in the way of making something easier or more palatable is a barrier.

No, that is not a barrier - that is your choice.

you are still entitled to go and cast a vote. Your not liking the parties is not a barrier to voting.
Reducing the risk of electoral fraud is something most right minded people would find more palatable and conversely increasing the chance of electoral fraud is something most right minded people in a democracy would find less palatable - so really you have just underminded yourargument there

 

[BoldonLad]

The last local elections I saw seven turned away due to not having the appropriate/approved ID. But I still believe the problem it was supposed to address was manufactured.
After all if you're the landlord of a property, and you want an extra vote or two you simply ensure your tenants are registered and accompany them to the polling station, with the appropriate ID and paperwork with instructions on who to vote for.

An on the ball, and a not backing down approach from the presiding officer stopped anything from happening.

No need for all that effort. Just register them for a postal vote and "help" them to fill it in. Applicable to nursing/care homes too, and, no doubt other situations.

 

[Ian H]

No, that is not a barrier - that is your choice.

you are still entitled to go and cast a vote. Your not liking the parties is not a barrier to voting.
Reducing the risk of electoral fraud is something most right minded people would find more palatable and conversely increasing the chance of electoral fraud is something most right minded people in a democracy would find less palatable - so really you have just underminded yourargument there

Voting fraud was negligible. Even Mogg admitted bringing in ID was actually gerrymandering. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65599380

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

No need for all that effort. Just register them for a postal vote and "help" them to fill it in. Applicable to nursing/care homes too, and, no doubt other situations.

Until recently my wife had no acceptable id

I asked my local council for help in getting her a voter id before the last local elections
the answer was that they had put in place what they could - but that the government was not saying exactly what the requirements were for accepting other id and using it to issue a voter id

the problem was that she has no photo id (old driving license and passport well out of date)
and I pay all the bills - for historic reasons

hence she has no way of proving who she is based on the rules

as it happened we decided to go on holiday to Greece so she got a passport
so the problem was got round by paying for it

but if we had not wanted to go abroad then - effectively - she would have had to pay for her to be able to vote

which is wrong no patter how you spin it
unless you can show proof of a major voter fraud problem - which no-one can

 

[classic33]

Until recently my wife had no acceptable id

I asked my local council for help in getting her a voter id before the last local elections
the answer was that they had put in place what they could - but that the government was not saying exactly what the requirements were for accepting other id and using it to issue a voter id

the problem was that she has no photo id (old driving license and passport well out of date)
and I pay all the bills - for historic reasons

hence she has no way of proving who she is based on the rules

as it happened we decided to go on holiday to Greece so she got a passport
so the problem was got round by paying for it

but if we had not wanted to go abroad then - effectively - she would have had to pay for her to be able to vote

which is wrong no patter how you spin it
unless you can show proof of a major voter fraud problem - which no-one can

For many councils, their election office was the last line of "defense" in the system.

Even if she had paid any bills in her name, bills do not have a photo of the person on them. Even some officially issued work ID wasn't sufficient. They met the basic requirements of having to prove who you were, in order to obtain it, but were still classed as insufficient.

There was an online application form that could be be used to apply for the new ID card.* The paper form had to be submitted earlier, to be accepted.

Even the Polling Card issued and sent out by your local council wasn't sufficient ID for the elections held this year. The system, to me, was nothing but a show. You want to vote without going to a Polling Station to vote, try for a postal vote. They were made easier to obtain to bring voter numbers/turnout up. I don't think they worked, and are open to misuse. Although the checks made before issuing one is supposed to be tightened in subsequent elections.

On the day, it came down to polling station staff to say if any issued ID was sufficient. With a possible call to a manager in Electoral Services to have the final say. I've seen more attempts on the day, in past years, to try and get a vote on the day than I did this year. The problem is a manufactured one, trying to address an issue that doesn't exist at the levels some are trying to get you to believe.



*The digital exclusion I mentioned earlier.

 

[BoldonLad]

Until recently my wife had no acceptable id

I asked my local council for help in getting her a voter id before the last local elections
the answer was that they had put in place what they could - but that the government was not saying exactly what the requirements were for accepting other id and using it to issue a voter id

the problem was that she has no photo id (old driving license and passport well out of date)
and I pay all the bills - for historic reasons

hence she has no way of proving who she is based on the rules

as it happened we decided to go on holiday to Greece so she got a passport
so the problem was got round by paying for it

but if we had not wanted to go abroad then - effectively - she would have had to pay for her to be able to vote

which is wrong no patter how you spin it
unless you can show proof of a major voter fraud problem - which no-one can

Interesting, but, my point was that postal votes are easier to “fiddle”.