Monday, September 11, 2023
Voter ID racist and discriminatory
The Guardian highlights a report by the all-party parliamentary group on democracy and the constitution, which has concluded that controversial rules governing voter identification led to racial and disability discrimination at this year’s local elections in England.
They say that MPs and peers on the all-party parliamentary group will publish a report today 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:
The report was co-authored by Sir Robert Buckland, who was justice minister in 2021 when the bill to introduce the rules was first launched in parliament, and who subsequently helped vote them through.
~ The committee is chaired by the Scottish National party MP John Nicolson and also includes Labour MPs and peers.
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.”
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.
The report says: “Their decision in that instance was … clearly discriminatory (and potentially unlawful) because they denied Andrea Barratt the right to cast a ballot purely on the basis of circumstances which arose as a direct result of a disability.”
The rules, which were used for a full election for the first time in May after a series of small-scale pilots, mean voters now have to show photographic identification at the polling booth.
When Boris Johnson first introduced the proposals to parliament in 2021, Downing Street said they were designed to prevent potential election fraud, despite only three people having been convicted for identity fraud at polling booths in the previous seven years.
Ministers limited the types of identification that could be accepted, and included, for example, older people’s travel passes, but not those of younger voters.
An interim study published by the Electoral Commission earlier this year found at least 14,000 people had been denied a vote because they lacked the correct form of ID.
The commission, which will publish a full report later this year, urged ministers to consider adapting the system to ensure people were not excluded.
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.
It also says that the rules are too reliant on decisions made by polling clerks and returning agents, which can be arbitrary and are not open to appeal.
The report’s authors call for ministers to broaden the types of documents that can be accepted as identification, and to allow those who fail ID checks to sign a legally binding declaration instead confirming their identity. They also call for more training to be given to returning officers.
Important as this report is, I am not holding my breath for reform. After all the system is working precisely as government intended it to.
They say that MPs and peers on the all-party parliamentary group will publish a report today 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:
The report was co-authored by Sir Robert Buckland, who was justice minister in 2021 when the bill to introduce the rules was first launched in parliament, and who subsequently helped vote them through.
~ The committee is chaired by the Scottish National party MP John Nicolson and also includes Labour MPs and peers.
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.”
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.
The report says: “Their decision in that instance was … clearly discriminatory (and potentially unlawful) because they denied Andrea Barratt the right to cast a ballot purely on the basis of circumstances which arose as a direct result of a disability.”
The rules, which were used for a full election for the first time in May after a series of small-scale pilots, mean voters now have to show photographic identification at the polling booth.
When Boris Johnson first introduced the proposals to parliament in 2021, Downing Street said they were designed to prevent potential election fraud, despite only three people having been convicted for identity fraud at polling booths in the previous seven years.
Ministers limited the types of identification that could be accepted, and included, for example, older people’s travel passes, but not those of younger voters.
An interim study published by the Electoral Commission earlier this year found at least 14,000 people had been denied a vote because they lacked the correct form of ID.
The commission, which will publish a full report later this year, urged ministers to consider adapting the system to ensure people were not excluded.
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.
It also says that the rules are too reliant on decisions made by polling clerks and returning agents, which can be arbitrary and are not open to appeal.
The report’s authors call for ministers to broaden the types of documents that can be accepted as identification, and to allow those who fail ID checks to sign a legally binding declaration instead confirming their identity. They also call for more training to be given to returning officers.
Important as this report is, I am not holding my breath for reform. After all the system is working precisely as government intended it to.
