I can't say for Birmingham, but electoral fraud in Bradford at least I thought was quite widely known of.

Family and community "leaders" often vote on behalf of the entire family/community through the use of postal votes.

I propose two options which should satisfy both those that find postal voting mortally repugnant, and those that fear disenfranchising those without ID:

1) You should be required to turn up in person at whatever polling station you used for your very first vote regardless of where you live now (donkey optional). You must bring along both parents (or their death certificates) and a recognised professional of good standing in their community who can vouch for you. A DNA sample and your fingerprints or retina scan can then be taken if you wish to use the fast track queue for future votes

2) Your vote is rolled into the "real-time" online accounts as HMRC introduce them. This would have the added bonus of you being able to change your preference at any time you like.

☑️ the I'd like to vote for a Tory box when setting up your account and that's what will be used for every election going forward till HMRC record you as dead or you go in and ☑️ the I'd like to vote for a UKIP

As an additional revenue raiser HMRC can then move into the "opinion poll" market - finally bringing a level of credebility back to the polls

By stopping fraudulent votes, by definition is not democracy

But we have to roll it around the rest of the country other wise it will be deemed racist. Hilarious , it's gone around full circle. Do the liberals want democracy or pick on the minority areas or have positive discrimination or their favourite turn a blind eye?

I'll wager now that eventually the only forms of ID accepted will be a passport or a full driving licence. That's a full driving licence, not a provisional one.

And if pensioners don't have either, I would not be surprised if passports are subsidised or given free to that demographic with others paying for it as we do now for TV Licences for the over 75's.

Removing those who vote from the lower paid and welfare dependent demographics under pension age is of benefit to the Tories and can easily be spun as "removing voter fraud" because who is going to be for fraud?

They won't scrap postal votes - the Tories and Labour have them mastered to a tee. Many recent by elections have effectively been won before polling day due to postal votes.

What was wrong with the old system - unless you are housebound or can prove you are away on holiday or business you must vote in person. People died for the right to vote - the least people can do is get off their backsides and walk or drive 5 minutes to their polling station to vote by secure secret ballot.

Cos if you are that lazy frankly you don't deserve the vote that many in the rest of the world would love to have.

My son and his wife were given two votes each in the referendum in two different constituancies.
Had ID been required it wouldn't have been a problem.
Besides it was the system that screwed up

And why was that?

Where they students?

Had they moved recently. or some other reason?

Anyone?

How many proven fraudulent votes were there in the 2015 general election?
If there is a official government estimate for the number of fraudulent votes in the 2015 general election what is it?
Did fraud effect the outcome of the general election?

The government "anti-fraud" measure of individual voter registration has resulted in about 800,000 people being disenfranchised.
Is there a official government estimate of how many people will not vote if voter ID at polling stations is introduced and if photo ID is required?

Going by media reports and police investigations the most widespread problem in the 2015 general election was the Conservative party accidentally breaking constituency campaign funding limits in marginal constituencies, and accidentally omitting stuff in its campaign accounts. Should the rules and punishment for that not be enhanced to prevent further accidents.

They had moved recently and the system hadn't caught up.

If you live in two places you can be registered in both - and can vote in local elections in both. But you can't vote twice in general elections or referendums. People could easily have voted twice in June and it not be picked up.

Postal votes are the biggest potential area of fraud because of the risk of voters being pressured to vote a certain way as its not a secret ballot.

Maybe you should ask the ex mayor of Tower hamlets if he knows how many!

Can't say I see a problem with this. As for postal votes if they don't already perhaps they should introduce identity checks for those registering like they do if you wish to access certain government websites such as to get a forecast for your state pension.

It not getting the postal votes that is the issue.

It's how they are cast that is the issue - no secret ballot and people (often women in some minority communities) pressured to vote a certain way.

The most sacred part of voting is that it is supposed to be a secret process and you cast your vote in private and no one else can see how you voted - so you cannot be bullied into voting a certain way. Postal voting has destroyed that and should be stopped except for those who truly cannot make it to the polling station early.

Maybe instead you could have early voting as in the US at the town hall and say libraries elsewhere and postal voting only for the frail elderly and those who can prove they are on holiday or away on work. Otherwise you vote in person on the day by secret ballot.

I think they should do this too, though it should extend to disabled younger people too and not just the elderly.

Until the recent US election I would have favoured electronic voting too, but I think our traditional approach is more secure.

Or the ex mayor of Bradford who produced the report.

Bradford covers a large area most of which doesn't have 'community' leaders, and precisely how is this measure supposed to stop postal fraud.

Discouraging legitimate voters from voting is democracy? Perhaps in a third world state like North Carolina it is, elsewhere not so.

The way to ensure a fair vote is to ensure as many votes as possible are by secret ballot - bar those like the disabled and elderly who are housebound. By definition postal votes cannot be certain to be cast by secret ballot - those in polling stations are.

Particularly in local elections in small wards dominated by one community it could be very easy for people - particularly women - to be forced or encouraged into voting a certain way or even have someone complete their ballot paper for them.

That is why postal voting needs to be curtailed as it is open to voter manipulation, suppression and oppression - presumably the sort of things you don't approve of in NC.

Only truly secret ballots guarantee a fair vote.

Your cunning plan part 2 may fail at the problem, that to register for an online HMRC account, you need the same photo ID you didn't have to vote.

That fails for the same reason idea 1 fails - the government won't pay for a proper ID for everyone . let alone something that costs money. They just end up putting forward worse and worse ideas to get around their own failure to provide one.

Hang on…..is that an Elephant I can see in the room.

As voter identification works perfectly well in Northern Ireland I can't see what the problem is here unless of course the naysayers are saying the rest of the UK are snowflakes and couldn't possibly quote

Forms of identification acceptable in NI

A UK, Irish or EEA driving licence (photographic part) (provisional accepted)
A UK, Irish or EU passport (note: EU passports are not accepted at UK Parliamentary elections)
An Electoral Identity Card (issued free of charge)
A Translink Senior SmartPass
A Translink 60+ SmartPass
A Translink War Disabled SmartPass
A Translink Blind Person’s SmartPass

http://www.eoni.org.uk/Electoral-Ide...tity-Card-FAQs

There is none. its a non issue. Where it might exist in some communities in small numbers, the seats tend to be safe anyway. In those communities the pressures to vote one way will continue to be applied .

The real impact will be to disenfranchise people who don't yet, or no longer have a car, those who don't , or cant, travel overseas, and wives and children who don't have thei names on ultility bills or bank accounts. The geriatrics will have postal votes anyway , so it will mainly hit the young, and poor.

The obvious difference is that they have already issued an ID card to vote with if you don't have anything else. And the UK doesn't have a translink equivalent - bus passes now match the retirement age so some people won't get one till they are 70