Want to vote? Youll need your NI, adress, DoB & Signature.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Squiggers, Jan 27, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6952227/Revealed-Britons-to-be-asked-for-NI-number-date-of-birth-and-signature-to-get-right-to-vote.html

    Some may have spotted this at the weekend. Personally, I'm not too impressed. Talk about an indentity thief's wet dream. If they press ahead with this, I'm certainly not registering, I like having my identity fairly secure thanks. :x
  2. Mr_Fingerz

    Mr_Fingerz LE Book Reviewer

    So it "could be compulsory within 5 years". I suspect that after May 2010, this will be kicked into the long grass until they can address the data security issues. The Information Commissioner will be none too pleased with this.
  3. When we all have ID cards,this information will be on them.What's the problem?
  4. Typical. They completely and utterly f**k up postal voting resulting in some wards having half the population of Islamabad living in a 2 up, 2 down house and end up offering a system that demands most of your standard proofs of ID struck on a spreadsheet looked after by the same underpaid staff who couldn't work out that a 2 bedroom house with 48 people living in may not be a totally truthfull reflection of fact...!
  5. I'd be more concerned about the NI number possibly turning up on a copy of the electoral roll if someone buys one - which you can legally.

    Its dodgy as feck, to be quite honest. The sooner we're rid of these morons, the better.
  6. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    It's actually a rather good idea - this presentation of sufficient I.D. for voting rights thing. However, and it's a big however, having the scheme run by your local council of oiks, power-crazed nobody's, thickos, incompetents and corrupt tw@ts is NOT the way to go about it.

    A national database based system, secured, or better still, biometric readers linked to a national database would be better, with access to that information kept about 100,000 light years from your local council window-lickers.

    There's no point saying "aah, no way, linking my info to a national database for voting, 'cos it's ripe for fraud" - where do you think you NI number comes from, and the fact it's already linked to your address and DoB somewhere in the system.

    Like I say - where it falls down is having no-mark clock-watching wasters in your local council employ with access to such sensitive data.
  7. The difference is that the Electoral Roll is publicly available. The edited version can be sold, and the full version can be inspected at Town Halls. Adding more identity details would be heaven for criminals; unless costly data sanitation was carried out. And it wouldn't solve electoral fraud unless system for postal voting is completely overhauled, and it can only make applying for a proxy vote harder.
  8. Problem is, biometrics isn't nearly good enough for this purpose, it's scarcely good enough for meal entitlement in schools, extend it over a database of more than a thousand users and it breaks. Try and roll this out for millions of users and tens of thousands of readers all trying to interrogate the database simultaneously during an election and you'll never get to the end of the fraud allegations.
  9. A more rigorous system is well overdue to prevent further abuses of the electoral system by the Asians.

    Not sure of the best way to do it, though...
  10. I have only read the thread title, and thus I say:


    Bit of a 'bummer' for the eighteen souls named 'Mohammed' applying for postal votes at an address with three bedrooms and three persons registered on the Electoral Roll.

    Sadly, I gather this will not apply to the forthcoming General Election and therefore in certain parts of the country I expect an avalanche of votes in favour of Brown and his mis-fits!
  11. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Whilst agree it would be quite difficult to roll out, we DO have to find a better way. All Labour did when they allowed postal voting was facilitate massive voting fraud, sure in the knowledge that it would benefit them the most when it inevitably occured.

    What is needed in this country is a 'one person, one vote' system, and one that ensures that nobody else can nick that vote. Surely, in the year 2010, with all the myriad technologies out there, our first-world nation could produce something.

    Of course we could, and it's not anywhere near impossible. All that is lacking is the political will. That's only lacking because the political parties are corrupt, and the 'Mother of Parliaments', the so-called 'home of democracy' in the 'land of the free' is slowly falling to a level closer to Afghan politics than it is an exemplar to the rest of the world.
  12. The quote above: sad - but even more sadly, very close to the truth.

    The National Insurance is fine but a passport and other documents may also be deployed. This pathetic excuse for a government will not introduce any tightening of the rules as they would suffer.

    PS: Postal Voting is an invitation to cheat and to commit a criminal offence.

    Postal Voting MUST be discontinued in the best interests of democracy and honesty.
  13. No thanks. I won't bother voting then. Having been a victim of ID theft twice in the last 3 years, I also can't but help noticing that my local council employs lots of West African immigrants too. All politicians are thieving cnuts anyway and all of the parties policies are bollocks.

    I'll just wait for the revolution. Should be one along soon...
  14. A solution may be to roll out biometric registration for postal/proxy voting for those without any obvious reason to not turn up in person. People should be encouraged to turn out in an election.
  15. If anybody has recently visited a construction site, he'll be aware that all these details (NI No., DoB, signature, etc) and more (health details, NoK, phone numbers, etc) are routinely demanded as part of the induction process. In the chain of people who have access to these details are the security staff who produce the site access card, generally people who do not have English as their first language, rarely stay in the same job for more than 12 months, change address rather more frequently and are lowly paid, thus open to financial incentives.

    So why the worry about such details being passed to a different branch of the same firm that issues most of them (i.e. HMG & Sons)?

    I don't understand why a much simpler method of identification isn't used - one that is used fairly effectively and cheaply in underdeveloped countries - fingerprinting. Official checks voter's fingers to confirm that he hasn't voted already, voter dips fingers in indelible ink and presses on blank ballot paper, official scans prints and checks against database (database required), voter tears off fingerprinted section of ballot paper and disposes of as he sees fit, votes and wobbles off back home for a cup of tea.

    It has the added advantage that if some loony party is elected, a vigilante group can round up everyone who has dyed fingers and lop them off so that they don't make the same mistake again. OK, there'll be a lot of people digitally challenged who weren't responsible for the loony party getting in, but the democratic process ensures that they'll be in the minority.