The hypocrisy and self-interest of the government harm us all

According to a report by the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) of the House of Commons, the election bill currently being passed by Parliament has not been fully reviewed, and there is no evidence to support the introduction of mandatory voter ID in all future elections "not at all good enough."

The report reviewed the government’s new election bill, and if passed, the bill would introduce photo identification at polling stations. It indicated that the bill “did not receive sufficient public consultation before its introduction”.

The bill is currently in the reporting stage of the House of Commons and is designed by the government to strengthen the integrity of the election process. It aims to further clarify the procedures for overseas voters, voting, the candidacy of EU citizens, and the functions and supervision of the Election Commission.

The PACAC report emphasized that the bill should "pass the pre-legislative review process" and the draft bill should be "reviewed by the joint committee."

Instead, the report recommends that the government should now “set a timetable for a more extensive review and integration of the electoral law.”

The report pointed out that there is insufficient evidence to support the introduction of the most controversial part of the bill, namely the mandatory voter ID scheme.

The report said: "We are worried that the evidence supporting the voter ID requirement is not good enough." "Given the comparable evidence base after Northern Ireland has adopted such measures, this may reduce the turnout rate in future elections."

In response to the report, Peter Stanyon, chief executive officer of the Association of Electoral Administrators (AEA), emphasized that his own organization "considered the lack of progress due to the planned introduction of [Voter ID] changes before the next British election. "

"There must be sufficient preparation time for legislation, administrative planning, delivery and voter education," he continued.

"It is vital that the draft secondary legislation and the proposed details of any voter ID plan should be submitted as early as possible in order to obtain detailed feedback and determine any unintended consequences, especially those that may inadvertently deprive or discriminate against voters or candidates. as a result of."

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Upgrade, Housing and Communities claimed that the bill would “eliminate the possibility of voter fraud and bring the rest of the UK into line with Northern Ireland, which has had a photo ID since 2003. Vote in the election".

The department pointed out that a new study it had just published claimed that the study showed that 98% of voters already have a photo file, which is on the broad list of acceptable types of identification.

The spokesperson continued: “The British government will provide additional funds to cover the cost of implementing our reforms. Voters who do not have the required photo ID can apply for a free local voter card.”

PACAC stated that among its other recommendations, the task of the Election Committee is to establish a “minimum standard for equipment provided by election managers” to ensure consistency in the introduction of voter IDs by local authorities.

These standards should "strive to ensure that people can vote independently when possible."

PACAC also proposes to amend and propose to require local authorities to notify people of the expiration of the rule of voting by mail to ensure that voters will not be unable to vote on polling day because of the automatic invalidation of mail voting.

Committee chairperson William Rager (Con) said: “Although seeking protection from potential voter fraud in UK elections is a noble undertaking, we still do not believe that the scale of the problem is sufficient to justify the solutions that have been proposed.”

"We believe that the election bill proposal lacks sufficient evidence base, timely consultation and transparency, all of which should be resolved before it makes any further progress."

"We cannot risk lowering our trust in the UK elections, which is why most of the committee members called for a moratorium on the bill to allow time to do more work to ensure that these measures fit their purpose."

Log in or register for a new account to join the discussion.

Interpersonal relationships are the key to better integration of healthcare, social care, and housing. Nick...

Brighton and Hove City Council