Whilst I am going to attempt it, I must admit it’s hard to criticise the government’s changes to voter ID when you consider the system we had before.
When Boris Johnson’s government passed the Elections Act 2022, a much-needed measure which required Photo ID to vote in elections, the Guardian letters page lit up. Professor Toby S James from the left-wing University of East Anglia railed at the “extreme photo ID requirements”. Also unwittingly convincing sane readers of the need for the changes, another reader said their octogenarian grandmother with dementia got confused at the polling station when she was asked for proof of who she was, and didn’t end up voting. One man lamented that “several” young people he knew were prevented from voting because they “did not have the necessary documents”. Well durr.
Voter ID was one of the few sensible reforms the Conservatives bothered to enact
Before this, notwithstanding Northern Ireland, no ID at all was needed in order to vote. Even the polling card you were sent in the post proudly boasted that you didn’t need to bring it with you. Before the Elections Act 2022, anyone could just turn up at the polling station, say a valid name and address and put your cross in a box.
In the same week in 2016 working as a cycle courier for Deliveroo, I demanded people who lived in flats produce ID before I gave them their order (to prevent opportunistic Katsu Curry theft), and then voted for the UK to leave the European Union without any ID at all. The British electoral system had been insanely naïve, despite electoral fraud being a real thing that people are jailed for. Or even not jailed for. You probably know Bangladeshi born Lutfur Rahman is back as mayor of Tower Hamlets after serving a five-year ban for vote rigging.
When the Labour government recently announced a reform of voting laws, most of the commentary was surrounding the extension of the franchise to 16 year olds. But one of the reforms glossed over was the change in rules on voter ID, specifically the inclusion of bank cards as a legal method to prove who you are. This is a return to electoral fraud hidden in plain sight.
Bank cards are not — as it might seem — a secure form of ID. In fact, a number of teenage bank accounts do not require any other form of ID check to open them, a parent or guardian just needs to have an account themself in order to open one on behalf of their offspring. Few checks are made of the under 16s because they often lack an existing ID to compare it with. In some places children can open an account with just a letter from your secondary school. Hardly difficult to fake.
But even if bank checks were watertight (which they aren’t, even for adults) has the government stopped to remember what actually appears on the bit of plastic? It’s often just initials. Without a photo ID and a couple of letters on a card, could somebody who has the same initials as you, vote with their own bank card? — And will virtual cards work? Young people increasingly don’t even possess a physical card. A simple bit of photo-editing could produce a fake one in anybody’s name. And without photos to compare, are polling station officials supposed to magically spot the fakes?
You may have heard of former Labour councillor Muhammed Hussain who was jailed for collecting uncompleted postal ballots from households which were then completed by his team. But could a community faith leader who knows the names and addresses of their flock, simply vote on their behalf without them even knowing? In this scenario they wouldn’t even need to employ voter intimidation, just create a stack of fake virtual bank cards and a group of people with smartphones could do the voting on behalf of the whole community. It’s an impressive move by Angela Rayner if she’s just made in-person voting easier to rig than postal votes. A pretty short-sighted one too, if Labour have noticed how fragile some of their seats are — especially where sectarian candidates, backed by “tight-knit” communities, might see this as an invitation for a more efficient GOTV operation.
Voter ID was one of the few sensible reforms the Conservatives bothered to enact, bringing Britain in line with much of the first world: so it’s unsurprising that Labour are on course to undermine it. By allowing flimsy, non-photo forms of ID like bank cards, and doing nothing to strengthen or promote the Voter Authority Certificate (Who has even heard of it?), they’re inviting abuse. And while they claim it’s about access, we should be asking: access for whom? The elderly? The young? Or just the more organised fraudsters? And if Labour cynically think it will benefit their own electoral chances, they should probably first ask themselves which communities are getting really good at the game.
