Government plans to make people show proof of ID before being able to cast their vote have attracted criticism from an influential parliamentary committee.
The Joint Committee on Human Rights said in a report published last week that the government must do more to demonstrate the need for voter ID and to mitigate against any barriers it may create to democratic participation.
The impact of current proposals, the committee decided, could fall disproportionately on groups such as older people, the disabled and members of minority communities, who may not have access to the required photo-ID.
Proposals for a Voter Card they may be able to use as an alternative prompted the committee to ask questions relating to the cost and ease of obtaining such a document and how well the scheme will be publicized.
Chair of the Human Rights Committee Harriet Harman said “The Government must prove that the need for people to get a Voter ID card does not act as a deterrent to voting. In particular they must demonstrate an understanding, so far lacking, of the impact of these measures on marginalised groups and show how they plan to ensure access to the ballot box for all”.
The Electoral Reform Society (ERS), along with other groups, has consistently warned that requiring voters to show ID could lead to disenfranchisement and that the prevalence of ‘personation’, trying to vote using a false identity, was too small for the measures to be necessary.
In an article published on their website they say ‘Make no mistake – voter ID will see legitimate voters turned away from the ballot box and, as this report warns, it’s likely to be those already marginalised in society such as the elderly, disabled people, and Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities’.
This has been backed by over 50,000 people who have signed a petition put forward by the ERS calling for voter ID to be removed from the Elections Bill currently going through parliament.
Voter ID proposals are included in the Elections Bill, a Cabinet Office statement about which says it is designed to ‘deliver on the Government’s manifesto commitment to strengthen the integrity of elections and ensure that our democracy remains secure, fair, modern and transparent’.
The Cabinet Office claim that since introduction of a voter ID scheme in Northern Ireland there have been no cases of personation and public confidence in how elections are run has been consistently high.
The bill also brings in measures around postal voting and how political campaigns are financed.
The Elections Bill and particularly the proposals around voter ID have attracted criticism from across the political spectrum.
Writing in The Guardian deputy leader of the Labour Party Angela Rayner described the bill as ‘an attack on our democracy’, going on to criticise it for preventing ordinary voters from using their democratic voice whilst making it easier for wealthy donors to exert influence.
Speaking to Politics Home former Tory cabinet minister David Davis described the plan to introduce voter ID as ‘dangerous’, and that it was ‘yet another identity management solution looking for a problem’.
The Green Party has campaigned consistently for real reform of the UK’s faulty electoral system, this is something very different to the dangerous and potentially undemocratic changes proposed under the Elections Bill.
Reforms backed by The Green Party include introducing proportional representation to make elections fairer, encouraging more diversity in candidates and MPs and working to create a written constitution protecting forever the democratic rights of citizens.
Disability campaigners have also expressed concern about the bill, Dr Mark Brookes MBE, Advocacy Lead for Dimensions UK told Open Access Government that being required to show photo-ID could disenfranchise 1.3 million UK adults with learning disabilities.
Concerns have also been expressed by the TUC, Save the Children and Greenpeace, a joint letter signed by these and other campaign groups and quoted in The Guardian warns the bill “bestows unprecedented and unchecked power to government over elections. At a stroke, the minister could ban whole sections of civil society, including unions and charities, from engaging in elections either by campaigning or donating”.
The UK elections system with its reliance on a ‘first past the post’ model that belongs to the nineteenth century is badly in need of reform. This process must be one that has at its heart a genuine desire to make our political system more open and representative.
The ‘reforms’ proposed under the Elections Bill do not follow this principle, they are a thinly disguised attempt to further concentrate political power in the hands of those who are already misusing it. If allowed to go ahead they risk doing serious damage to our democracy, economy and society.