Voter ID pilot Schemes

"morons" for correctly applying the law as it stands?
The law probably doesn't specify that ID has to be a passport (current) or driving license, but few if any will know what other IDs look like, or will receive any training. The result will be genuine voters disenfranchised as council drones will not deviate from strict laid down guidance, legal or not, for fear of disciplinary action or other accusations of discrimination.

This is already happening to those who dont have new style driving licences or passports. Nothing else is usually acceptable.

There are reasons for this. If you don't have a passport, you might be an illegal immigrant. So this makes life a bit more difficult for an illegal immigrant. Former Home Sec's Theresa May's 'smoke 'em out' policy that encourages all public and private bodies and service providers to make life difficult for them. But it also makes life difficult for citizens too.
 
So have you ever turned up at the polling station and found someone else had voted for you?
No, but that wasn’t my point. If a fraudelent vote is cast for a rival candidate in my constituency then it effectively nullifies my vote.

Also, I’ve never been murdered but I still expect the authorities to take some steps to keep the incidence of such crimes down.

Finally, at the risk of seeming like an unbearable pedant, please note that an ellipsis contains precisely three dots. Extra dots don’t make your arguments any more convincing.
 
The law probably doesn't specify that ID has to be a passort.

If you don't have a passport, you might be an illegal immigrant. So this makes life a bit more difficult for an illegal immigrant. Former Home Sec's Theresa May's 'smoke 'em out' policy that encourages all public and private bodies and service providers to make life difficult for them. But it also makes life difficult for citizens too.
Illegal immigration is already making life difficult for citizens. Schools, hospitals, housing and GP surgeries in Slough and other towns and cities are overwhelmed. Citizens need, pay for and deserve to access these facilities before the dregs of the third world who have no interest in anything other than taking while they can and changing the UK to reflect the shitholes they escaped from.

Producing id to vote should be the least of their worries.
 
No, but that wasn’t my point. If a fraudelent vote is cast for a rival candidate in my constituency then it effectively nullifies my vote.

Also, I’ve never been murdered but I still expect the authorities to take some steps to keep the incidence of such crimes down.

Finally, at the risk of seeming like an unbearable pedant, please note that an ellipsis contains precisely three dots. Extra dots don’t make your arguments any more convincing.
Like your pedantry. I will take the opportunity to add that a driving licenCe licenSes one to drive.
 
Like your pedantry. I will take the opportunity to add that a driving licenCe licenSes one to drive.
Indeed. Licences is the word for the plural.

Much like Billy practises football, between the two dental practices.

May be going a little off topic here though.
 
The law probably doesn't specify that ID has to be a passport (current) or driving license, but few if any will know what other IDs look like, or will receive any training. The result will be genuine voters disenfranchised as council drones will not deviate from strict laid down guidance, legal or not, for fear of disciplinary action or other accusations of discrimination.

This is already happening to those who dont have new style driving licences or passports. Nothing else is usually acceptable.

There are reasons for this. If you don't have a passport, you might be an illegal immigrant. So this makes life a bit more difficult for an illegal immigrant. Former Home Sec's Theresa May's 'smoke 'em out' policy that encourages all public and private bodies and service providers to make life difficult for them. But it also makes life difficult for citizens too.
The signature word in your first sentence is "probably". Try reading again your second sentence "...council drones will not deviate from strict laid down guidance..." Of course staff won't, because it's basic that electoral rules should be (a) clearly publicised so voters know what's required and (b) then applied by the book, not made up by council "morons" and "drones" as they go along, otherwise you will find firearms certificates accepted at one polling station and refused at the next. Hope that makes it clearer.
 
The law probably doesn't specify that ID has to be a passport (current) or driving license, but few if any will know what other IDs look like, or will receive any training. The result will be genuine voters disenfranchised as council drones will not deviate from strict laid down guidance, legal or not, for fear of disciplinary action or other accusations of discrimination.

This is already happening to those who dont have new style driving licences or passports. Nothing else is usually acceptable.

There are reasons for this. If you don't have a passport, you might be an illegal immigrant. So this makes life a bit more difficult for an illegal immigrant. Former Home Sec's Theresa May's 'smoke 'em out' policy that encourages all public and private bodies and service providers to make life difficult for them. But it also makes life difficult for citizens too.
When photo ID became mandatory in NI they started offering a free ID card. I have no idea how many people use them.
 
I couldn't agree more. I think that in the UK we are a little 'up our own arses' about ID.

In Belgium, that well-known human rights hell-hole, it's illegal to not be able to identify yourself to a police officer.

In The Netherlands (another well known ascendant North Korea), there is a compulsory national ID card system, which applies to EU nationals. Simply put, when a “valid reason” is given by a police officer then ID has to be shown, and in a designated security risk area (such as an airport) ID can be demanded with no specific reason offered by the police.

In Spain, it is mandatory to carry government issued ID at all times; whether you are Spanish, an EU national, or a foreigner living or holidaying in the country. For UK citizens this = passport.

In Portugal, ID cards are compulsory.

And you know what, I don't see cattle trucks heading East from any of these places.......................
This.

Some years ago, I was going out with a Belgian girl who was working as an air hostess at Gatwick. She had been a ballet dancer until her breasts got too big and she grew too tall. She used to go off like a frog in a sock and swear in French at the most crucial moments.

...where was I?

Oh, yes. There was once we were in a rush to get somewhere. We came barrelling out of the house, piled into the car and she swore. I asked what was wrong, and she looked at me and asked, "Can I drive without ID in this country?"

I told her she could, and off we went.

The point is, she saw it as perfectly acceptable to have to carry ID. The real point is that it is NOT an infringement of civil liberties.

Again, you're back to the issue of who is suggesting that it is, and what their motives are. I've no objection to carrying some form of ID. As many other posts have have referenced, even if tangentially, we already do in many forms. I'm content that an ID card system would make the country safer and fairer.

If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to worry about. Sod the intellectual debate.
 
Last edited:
When photo ID became mandatory in NI they started offering a free ID card. I have no idea how many people use them.
Agreed, the Northern Ireland Electoral Identity card is accepted by some airlines for flights within UK, by banks and building societies, and as proof of age for alcohol purchase. As you know there are in all 7 kinds of photo ID cards which are accepted in NI for electoral purposes, but they are all clearly publicised and their acceptability not left to the whim of polling staff.
 
Last edited:
Of course it is - if you can be fined for not carrying it, it infringes civil liberties. The argument is whether this is acceptable.
I don't think anyone sensible is suggesting a perma carry ID. Just that acceptable ID be produced when you want something from Britain, like unlimitted free NHS treatment, a job, a roof over your head, a vote etc.
 
I don't think anyone sensible is suggesting a perma carry ID. Just that acceptable ID be produced when you want something from Britain, like unlimitted free NHS treatment, a job, a roof over your head, a vote etc.
Fair enough, and to make that point - when the compulsory ID scheme was proposed I signed up to put money towards a fighting fund and to refuse to comply. I also carry photo ID with me pretty much all the time - I need it for certain parts of my job where I may need to prove my identify. While this is confusing to some, my issue is not identifying myself should I need to (and as a result of my choice of job etc.) but rather being legally required to have identification on me at all times ("papers please").
 
I don't think anyone sensible is suggesting a perma carry ID. Just that acceptable ID be produced when you want something from Britain, like unlimitted free NHS treatment, a job, a roof over your head, a vote etc.
That sounds like a sensible idea and a fair compromise. I just have to remember to take it with me when I plan to get into an accident and need emergency unlimited free NHS treatment.
 
You carry a wallet?
Or, if you are running/cycling etc you have a credit-card sized pocket?
That's my point. You need to have it with you whenever you go out, which makes it a perma carry by default. I take mine everywhere, except when I go running in the woods (Maybe a bad idea).

I have no issue with ID. I've been carrying one in one form or another since I was 17 and I can't remember a single instance of it being abused by anyone in authority.
 
There is an irony in the ID card carrying debate.

Ask yourselves "who currently has to carry an ID card"?

The answer to that is members of the military and civvy employees (and even the RAF :p), police officers and civvy employees, NHS workers, civil servants, fire and rescue, coast guard, MPs etc etc....in fact, the only people who are required to carry an ID are the very people who on the whole (but unfortunately not exclusively) don't come to the attention of the authorities and don't tend to commit offences (I know there are exceptions).

Whereas, the small proportion of the general population otherwise known as 'pond scum', are exempt incase it infringes on their civil liberties.

Yet again, the tail is wagging the dog.
 
That's my point. You need to have it with you whenever you go out, which makes it a perma carry by default. I take mine everywhere, except when I go running in the woods (Maybe a bad idea).

I have no issue with ID. I've been carrying one in one form or another since I was 17 and I can't remember a single instance of it being abused by anyone in authority.
Bingo, house called.................if a person hasn't served they do not get it. spot on chap.
 
I've still got my ID card from the1940's which wouldn't pass muster to a boy scout jamboree. Given advances in technology like retinal scan and holograms I think everyone [who is entitled] should have one. Costly but nothing like the money given to the collective kleptocracy that is Africa by HM Government each year. Compulsory voting but no ID card - No vote. It's doable.
 
There is an irony in the ID card carrying debate.

Ask yourselves "who currently has to carry an ID card"?

The answer to that is members of the military and civvy employees (and even the RAF :p), police officers and civvy employees, NHS workers, civil servants, fire and rescue, coast guard, MPs etc etc....in fact, the only people who are required to carry an ID are the very people who on the whole (but unfortunately not exclusively) don't come to the attention of the authorities and don't tend to commit offences (I know there are exceptions).

Whereas, the small proportion of the general population otherwise known as 'pond scum', are exempt incase it infringes on their civil liberties.

Yet again, the tail is wagging the dog.
Nobody has to carry an ID card at all times.

I have an MOD90 and a warrant card and I only carry them when I need to.

The point is, making people produce ID to vote at a polling station to prevent voter fraud, where there is little or no voter fraud is nonsense, and would seem to be designed by people looking to deny a vote to other people who would vote for the other lot.

End postal voting. 99%+ problem solved.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top