Author: Mike Wright, Head of Communications www.electoral-reform.org.uk 

This week three separate independent reports have exposed the extent of the unnecessary damage voter ID has wrought to our democracy. Voter ID was rushed through for the local elections in May which meant voters needed to produce a government-approved form of identification before they voted.

An interim report by the Electoral Commission published earlier this year showed that at least 14,000 people were prevented from casting their vote, after being turned away from polling stations and not returning. Further reports this week by the Electoral Commission, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Democracy and the Constitution, and the Local Government Information Unit, have now shed further light on how this policy has affected voters.

“some people found it harder than others to show accepted voter ID, including disabled people and the unemployed”

The Electoral Commission: Report on the May 2023 local elections in England

The Electoral Commission released its full report on voter ID at the local elections and found that it had a disproportionate effect on disabled and unemployed voters, who were more likely not to vote due to not having ID. It also found a greater proportion of 18-25-year-olds as well as people from ethnic minority backgrounds said they had turned up to polls without ID.

The report called for a number of changes to the ID rules including reviewing the types of acceptable ID, allowing for vouching (where one voter attests for another), giving people without an accepted form of ID more time to apply for a Voter Authority Certificate, and to improve the data collected on who is affected by voter ID. The report concluded: “It is crucial that improvements are made at the earliest opportunity, particularly given there are important elections that are due to be held during the next 18 months, to improve accessibility and support those people who do not have an accepted form of ID”.

The current voter-ID system is, as it stands, a “poisoned cure” in that it disenfranchises more electors than it protects

The APPG on Democracy and the Constitution: Voter ID – What went wrong and how to fix it

This report found that voter ID had had a disproportionate impact on different people and warned that the “inherent ambiguity in the regime creates a real risk of injustice and potential discrimination.” The report highlighted the case of an immunocompromised woman who was turned away from a polling station after she refused to remove her mask to be identified. The report added: “The current voter-ID system is, as it stands, a ‘poisoned cure’ in that it disenfranchises more electors than it protects.”

Administrators were unconvinced that the introduction of voter ID has reduced public concerns about fraud

Local Government Information Unit: The Impact of Voter ID: The Views of Administrators

The Unit warned in its report that it “is still not clear that voter ID brings any benefits to the process” of elections and that electoral works did not see personation fraud “as a major issue” prior to the 2023 elections. However, it warned that voter ID had put additional pressures on electoral and polling station staff and warned that action is needed to “stop these invisible pressures from developing into unignorable election failures.”

Three reports, three different areas of failure for voter ID

These three reports lay bare in stark fashion how voter ID has made it disproportionately harder for different groups of voters to exercise their basic democratic right and also threatens to cause problems in the coming general election. We should be looking to strengthen our democracy by increasing turnout and increasing access to voting, not throwing unnecessary barriers in front of people.

With just one conviction and one caution for personation fraud recorded at the 2019 election, voter ID was always a solution in search of a problem. Yet now we can see it has caused problems with our elections that were not there before.

It’s clear that the Government needs to scrap this unnecessary and damaging policy before the next general election, or at the very least make sweeping changes to prevent it from causing major disruption.

A new £100 million redevelopment of Torbay’s tired hospital is an opportunity that only arises once in a generation, councillors have been told.

Guy Hender www.radioexe.co.uk

 New plans for Torbay Hospital (courtesy: Torbay and South Devon NHS Trust)

Some of its oldest buildings will make way for state-of-the-art new facilities, while a new medical hub in Torquay town centre will handle tens of thousands of appointments every year.

“These are really exciting times for Torbay’s NHS,” said Adel Jones, director of transformation and partnerships at the Torbay and South Devon NHS Trust.

“It feels like a once-in-a-generation opportunity.”

The council’s adult social care and health committee was shown the latest plans for the massive hospital scheme, which has already started to take shape.

A new radiotherapy centre will open in October, followed by an endoscopy suite the following month. New day-case theatres will open in the new year.

It comes as part of the government’s New Hospital Programme and will be finished by 2030.

As part of the same project, a community diagnostic centre will be built in Torquay, operated by the privately-owned InHealth Group.

“We haven’t seen this kind of investment in the NHS here for a very long time,” said Ms Jones.

And programme director Chris Knights added: “It isn’t just about building a better hospital. It’s about the way we deliver our care.”

The committee was told that the changes would allow the overcrowded emergency department to expand, with twice as much space available.

“It was built in the 1960s for 1960s activity,” he said. “It needs to be upgraded completely.”

The new £5 million town centre hub is designed to offer more than 46,000 patients ultrasound, MRI, CT and other tests every year. It could open as early as April next year.

Councillors raised concerns about how the hospital will deal with an ever-growing Torbay population, and Ms Jones told them: “Care is changing.

“We will be using more digital techniques to help people stay in their own homes. People can be overseen by consultants while staying in their own homes and being monitored there.”

Council leader David Thomas (Con, Preston) said the project was ‘fantastically good news’ and a huge investment for Torbay.

And committee chairman Patrick Joyce (Con, Wellswood) added: “It’s exciting and it’s long overdue. We need to be able to support the people that live in Torbay, and there are really good things ahead.”

A new report by the Electoral Commission recommends expanding the list of accepted IDs, providing options for those without ID such as being vouched for by another voter, and raising awareness of the support available for disabled voters.

Sean O’Grady www.independent.co.uk 

A new report by the Electoral Commission raises significant concerns about the impact on the next general election of the new rules on voter ID. Under legislation passed in 2022, voters in mainland Britain are now required to show photographic ID at polling stations, and when registering for a postal vote. According to the commission’s survey of how officials dealt with the new rules at May’s local elections in England, significant improvements need to be made in voter awareness, and in resources available to returning officers, for the system to work better in the more intense atmosphere of a general election where turnout is typically twice as high. (Voter ID is already well established in Northern Ireland, where historically electoral fraud has been more widespread.)

The commission recommends expanding the list of accepted IDs, providing options for those without ID such as being vouched for by another voter, and raising awareness of the support available for disabled voters.

What’s wrong with the system?

The commission says its work confirms earlier interim findings after the May elections in England: most who wanted to vote were able to do so, but some groups struggled to meet the ID requirement. It says this stemmed from two overlapping issues: variations in levels of ownership of accepted ID (such as passports), and awareness of the new requirement. In particular, there seems to be scant use of the new Voter Authority Certificate, which is free photo ID for those without a passport or driving licence. Only 25,000 were used in May, for example. Voters who didn’t have the right ID tended to be poorer and from ethnic minorities. Given that municipal elections have lower turnouts anyway, the real impact on a national election is yet to be seen, and the commission has concerns.

How big is the problem?

It’s hard to be precise, but the commission has some estimates. The most visible manifestation of the problem is voters turning up to polling stations without adequate identification. (They are turned away; some, but not all, return.) “At least 0.25 per cent of people who tried to vote at a polling station in May 2023 were not able to because of the voter ID requirement – this was equivalent to approximately 14,000 people who were not issued with a ballot paper,” the commission says.

That is a relatively small figure, but regrettable because everyone has a right and civic duty to vote and the scale of fraud was always far less than those sorts of numbers. Frauds were also almost entirely confined to local, not general, elections and typically involved postal voting rather than ‘‘impersonation’’ at the polling station.

However, the much bigger problem is also far less visible: those who decide not to bother voting simply because the necessary photo ID isn’t readily to hand. The commission’s survey evidence indicates that “around four per cent of all people who said they did not vote at the elections on 4 May listed the ID requirement as the reason… three per cent blamed not having the necessary ID, and one per cent said they disagreed with the new requirement”.

Democracy Volunteers, a group of election observers, found that more than one per cent of voters were turned away from polling stations because of ID requirements at the local elections – half of whom appeared to be from minority ethnic backgrounds.

The emergence of a new phenomenon – ‘‘election greeters’’ on the street outside some polling stations – will also have turned voters away before they had a chance to record an unsuccessful attempt.

In any case, compulsory photo ID does suppress and distort the vote, and by more than fraud ever did. If maximising participation and maintaining confidence in parliamentary democracy is the aim, voter ID has failed.

What is the electoral impact?

It hits the poor and ethnic minorities hardest, and some commentators say that it therefore tended to hurt Labour and help the Conservatives. However, even if that were so, it is not quite absolute, because Labour doesn’t “own” 100 per cent of the votes of the poor or of all undifferentiated ethnic minorities in any case – so it’s a relative effect.

In addition, it depends on how the poor and ethnic minorities were going to vote. At the 2019 general election, the Conservatives did markedly better than normal and better than the opposition in harvesting support among older and less well-off sections of society. For this reason, the former cabinet minister Jacob Rees-Mogg declared at the National Conservatives conference earlier this year: “Parties that try and gerrymander end up finding their clever scheme comes back to bite them, as, dare I say, we found by insisting on voter ID for elections. We found the people who didn’t have ID were elderly and they, by and large, voted Conservative, so we made it hard for our own voters and we upset a system that worked perfectly well.”

But wasn’t it a Conservative election manifesto commitment?

Not exactly. The 2019 document ‘‘Get Brexit Done Release Britain’s Potential’’ merely promised: “We will protect the integrity of our democracy, by introducing identification to vote at polling stations, stopping postal vote harvesting and measures to prevent any foreign interference in elections.” So, yes to proof of identity, but no mention of passports or photo ID. In any case, adjusting a safe and secure democratic franchise is best done by cross-party consensus.

Would Labour reverse it?

They have not explicitly promised to, but it is heavily implied. Florence Eshalomi, shadow minister for democracy, has commented: “It is wrong that the Conservatives have snatched the ability of legitimate voters to have a say in their services and society… ministers are required to hold a comprehensive review into this discredited policy and there must be no more dither and delay.”

Cornwall Council has agreed to sell historic Grade II listed flats in Looe, which are worth £640,000, for just £1 to ensure affordable homes stay in the centre of a Cornish town.

Lee Trewhela www.cornish-times.co.uk 

The council’s cabinet approved a recommendation yesterday (Wednesday, September 13) to release the 11 Coastguard Flats in Looe to a community land trust for the nominal fee as the maintenance of the building is too costly for the council.

An appraisal was carried out by Cornwall Housing in 2021 which concluded that the refurbishment of the building on Looe’s North Road was financially unviable and consequently the property, which was previously four houses, was declared surplus to the council’s needs. With support from Looe councillors Edwina Hannaford and Armand Toms, Three Seas Community Land Trust stepped in and said it would be able to carry out a full refurbishment of the properties at a cost of over £1 million, which it will achieve by grant funding.

Cornwall Council’s deputy leader Cllr David Harris said: “This will retain much-needed affordable housing provision in Looe. Coastguard Flats is a substantial Grade II listed building. It is highly likely that an open market sale would result in the loss of affordable housing provision in Looe and have a negative impact on the housing service by increasing the demand for temporary accommodation.

“A community-led redevelopment scheme would ensure the flats would still be used for affordable housing provision. Three Seas intends to carry out a full refurbishment of the properties and have said the cost of works will be in excess of £1-million.”

The cabinet meeting heard that the project would be hard to achieve without grant funding, which is available from Homes England, which supports the project.

Cllr Ollie Monk, portfolio holder for housing, added: “When I first got the job, this was one of the first places I visited. I came away thinking that could be a great opportunity but it became quickly apparent that it was a really tricky site for the council. Thanks to councillors Edwina Hannaford and Armand Toms, and Three Seas Community Land Trust, we’ve managed to get a deal together.

“It keeps affordable housing right in the heart of the Looe community. Any affordable housing is now being built three or four miles away such is the shortage of land available in the centre of Looe. I can’t wait to see the progress of the project.”

Cllr Hannaford, said she is “delighted” by the move after years of campaigning, adding: “Providing secure affordable housing is incredibly important for the people of Looe. The lack of affordable housing in Looe is a real emergency, replicated across Cornwall.”