Currently, the UK is reassessing our restrictive voter ID laws. The Representation of the People Bill, if passed, would see an expansion of the types of accepted voter ID – making voting more accessible.

Whilst one side of the ‘special relationship’ looks to make their voter ID requirements more accessible, the other could be restricting them.

The Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility Act – the ‘SAVE America’ Act – is awaiting a date in the Senate and reassesses the US’s relationship with voter ID.

The President has argued the Bill is a way to safeguard American elections, while opponents are fighting it to… safeguard American elections. The Bill certainly raises questions about access to voting rights, the centralisation of power and has a strong hint of being a solution in search of a problem.

Sound familiar?

How American voter ID works

Under American federalism, each state is allowed to administer their own elections. So, there is a patchwork system of requirements across the country.

As there is no universal rule, a Texan voter could produce their driving license, in Ohio you could forget your ID so sign an affidavit, and in California or New York no ID is required. What may be surprising to some is that because of these mixed rules, contrary to public perception, the UK has stricter voter ID rules than any US state.

One of the founding principles of the United States is its federal administration of power, which allows states to make their own decisions. So, whilst this patchwork system may not make sense to UK voters, the SAVE Act has faced criticism for flying in the face of a founding principle of the United States.

What the Bill would change

The Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility Act would require American voters in every state to prove their US citizenship when they register to vote and present photo ID when heading to the ballot box for federal elections.

Yet as in the UK, the evidence of US voter fraud is vanishingly small. The President argues the Act will prevent non-citizens participating in elections. Something that is already illegal.

The US-based Brennan Centre for Justice has found negligible rates of fraud across America and claims that elections have been subject to mass fraud have been consistently debunked.

Additionally, in the US there is no free universal ID and a high rate of people who do not have access to citizenship documentation, like a passport or birth certificate. The Brennan Centre estimates 9% of eligible voters, 21.3 million Americans, do not have ready access to this documentation. Of those 21.3 million, they disproportionately come from low-income backgrounds, are more likely to be black or Hispanic, and elderly.

In the wake of the violent presence of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agents on American streets, it is not hard to guess which groups of eligible voters may be put off voting because of these requirements.

The tone of this debate may sound familiar to those who remember the Elections Act 2022 in the UK. A policy that could restrict voting disproportionately for large numbers of people already having a tough time in response to a problem that is minimal at best.

What stage is the legislation at?

So far, the SAVE Act has passed through the House of Representatives, currently controlled by the Republican party, and is headed towards the Senate.

It hasn’t reached the Senate yet, but it is narrowly controlled by the Republicans. Though, with a healthy opposition. The Act is unlikely to go further due to filibustering and procedural barriers.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the SAVE Act is unlikely to become law, but the debate will endure.

The contrast couldn’t be more striking. Just as the UK is expanding our voter ID requirements to make sure no eligible voter misses out, Washington is considering tightening their rules at a federal level.

The lesson is the same for both sides of the ‘special relationship’; securing elections should not and does not have to cost making voting accessible.

Support the Electoral Reform Society

If you join the Society as a member, your contributions will support our work in parliament, as well as in the press and online – making the case, and backing it up – for how we can fix Westminster’s broken system.

Join the Electoral Reform Society today

At the Electoral Reform Society, we believe democracy is never a finished project.

Something so hard won requires constant attention, updating and improvement if it is to remain healthy. That is particularly true at a time when public trust in politics is being eroded, political scandals continue to dominate headlines, and concerns about foreign interference in British democracy are growing.

Against this backdrop, we welcome the Representation of the People Bill, which saw it’s second reading debate this week. The Bill contains several important steps forward: extending the vote to all 16 and 17-year-olds, widening the range of accepted voter ID, and strengthening the powers of the Electoral Commission. These are reforms that we have long championed.

What MPs were saying in the debate

The Second Reading debate this week reflected the seriousness of the moment. MPs across the House recognised the stakes for the health of our democracy. While many welcomed the Bill’s direction, there was also broad acknowledgement that it does not yet match the scale of the challenge. It represents genuine progress, but stops short of the deeper, systemic reforms that our democracy ultimately requires.

Today sees the first reading of the Representation of the People Bill, the government’s landmark legislation reforming how elections work. This promises to make some fundamental reforms to the way we vote, as well as who can cast a ballot on election day – many of which we have been campaigning on for years.

The headline reform is the first expansion of the franchise in half a century, as the bill will expand the voting age in all elections to 16. Firstly, this will end the unfair and absurd situation that now exists where 16 and 17-year-olds can vote in half the country, Scotland and Wales, but not the other half, England and Northern Ireland, purely due to where they live. Sixteen and 17-year-olds have been voting in Scottish Parliament and local elections since 2014, and in Wales for Senedd and council elections since 2021. The ERS has long campaigned to end the inequalities that have developed in our national franchise, and it is right that ministers are taking action to address them.

Lowering the voting age will future-proof our democracy by engaging young people in the political process at the point where they are starting to take on the responsibilities of adulthood, and also help them cast that all-important, habit-forming first vote. When people vote early, they are more likely to keep voting for life. The important thing is now to make sure young people are supported to cast the crucial first vote with proper, impartial citizenship education explaining how politics and elections work in this country, as well as improving the voter registration system.

It is likely the reason the government chose to call the legislation the Representation of the People bill was so it harkens back to predecessor acts of the same name that widened voting rights, starting with the first Representation of the People Act of 1832 (more commonly known as the Great Reform Act), which arguably set Britain on course to becoming the modern democracy it is now.

Flexible voting and improving registration

The bill is also looking to make voting simpler and improve the registration process This is something the ERS has again campaigned hard for, as the Electoral Commission estimates that around 8 million people are currently not on the electoral register and the UK has recently been named as one of the most difficult places to register to vote.

Participation is the lifeblood of our democracy, and if fewer people are voting it is becoming weaker. If you are eligible, you should be registered automatically. Automating voter registration will make life simpler for voters, help enfranchise millions and set our democracy on a healthier path by helping to ensure everyone who is entitled to do so has the opportunity to cast their vote.

The bill gives Electoral Registration Officers powers to access existing government data in order to register voters more automatically and allows for pilots to take place to try out different ways of doing this. It is urgent that the government takes these pilots forward quickly to ensure automatic registration is in place for the next general election and millions of voters don’t miss out on taking part.

Cleaning up money in politics

Another key area of the bill is looking at tightening the rules around donations and money flowing into our politics. After the last few weeks, the public will be rightly concerned about the influence that money and the super wealthy can exert on our democracy. Our politics should not be for sale to the highest bidder, and the current rules are outdated and riddled with loopholes that help donors evade transparency – which only damages trust in politics.

There is a caveat with the current bill, in that the government launched an inquiry into foreign financial interference in our politics, which is being headed by the former senior civil servant Philip Rycroft. This is likely to bring forward recommendations that could further shape the bill. So will likely see the full scope of what the bill intends after the inquiry reports back at the end of March.

This bill is an opportunity that must be taken to ensure dark money doesn’t corrupt our democracy. We have long called for greater transparency and tighter rules on political finance, and it is welcome to see proposed changes to protect the UK’s democracy from foreign funding.

There also needs to be a donations cap to prevent huge sums pouring into politics and distorting it towards serving special interests rather than the national interest. The rules need to ensure that politicians are always focused on the needs of voters, not donors.

A big missed opportunity on electoral reform

However, there is a huge glaring omission in the bill – and that is the lack of action on Westminster’s faltering electoral system. At the moment, millions of votes simply don’t count.

The last general election was the most disproportional ever, meaning this Parliament least represents how the British people voted in history. That situation could get worse at the next general election as our two-party system struggles to cope with the new reality of five and six-party politics.

We welcomed the government’s move to scrap First Past the Post for mayoral elections, but the same rationale should mean that ministers can also see that the same malfunctioning system should be scrapped for Westminster.

If the government really wants their Representation of the People Bill to live up to its name, it needs to scrap Westminster’s outdated and distorting voting system and replace it with a fair proportional system that accurately reflects how people voted with seats in Parliament.

Add your name to our call for a representative parliament

Add your name – the people should be represented

In a statement to parliament today, the democracy minister set out the changes the government plans to make in the forthcoming elections bill.

Last week we set out what we hoped to see in the legislation, and it is great to see so many of those democratic reforms confirmed by today’s statement.

Thanks to your support, we are now going to see some hugely positive steps towards improving our democracy.

Extending the franchise

This highly anticipated bill will make the historic move to extend the franchise to 16- and 17-year-olds, something we have long campaigned for. We know that engaging young people in democracy, alongside improved democratic education and support, makes long-term improvements to participation and engagement, and not just for young people.

A registration revolution

Alongside this, the government confirmed their intention to improve voter registration. We have consistently been making the case for a modernised and more automated registration system to make it simple for voters. The UK’s registration system lags other countries and puts up unnecessary barriers for voters. We need to get the missing millions on the register and this will help to do so.

A reassessment of the unnecessary voter ID scheme

After a long campaign highlighting the unnecessary and damaging impact of compulsory photographic voter ID, it is great to see that the government has listened and will be making significant changes to the scheme to scrap the need for photo ID and move to allowing the types of non-photographic ID that voters will have access to, such as bank cards.

This is something we have been pressing for, and it will go a long way to reducing the damage of this unnecessary scheme.

Tackling dodgy money in politics

If dark money can buy influence, it damages our democratic institutions. And right now, that’s a real risk.

Measures to tighten political finance loopholes to ensure that impermissible donations cannot sneak into our politics and measures to strengthen the Electoral Commission’s ability to enforce the rules are also crucial in protecting our democracy.

Your support is backing our campaign

Thanks to your support, today we have moved a step closer to a democracy that works for everyone. You can support our work further by becoming a member.

Members support our work in parliament, in the press and online – making the case, and backing it up – for how we can fix Westminster’s broken system.

Become a Member

One year on from the General Election and we are eagerly awaiting the government’s Elections Bill, expected to be tabled in the next session of this parliament.

The bill is likely to contain measures, promised in the manifesto, on extending the franchise to 16 and 17 year olds, improving voter registration and strengthening the rules around political donations.

We would welcome these changes. Reforms to ensure everyone can access their vote and to reduce the influence of money in our politics cannot come soon enough.

With just over half of eligible voters participating in last year’s General Election, the need for bold, effective change is clear. The Elections Bill offers a real opportunity to upgrade our electoral arrangements and begin to address these problems – and it must not be wasted.

Here’s what we believe the Elections Bill must include to strengthen our democracy:

Votes at 16

Research shows that the earlier someone is engaged in a democratic process the more likely they are to continue to engage throughout their life. Lowering the voting age to 16 and strengthening citizenship education can help nurture more active citizens for the future health of our democracy. 16 and 17 year olds in Scotland and Wales can already vote in national and local elections and where people see votes at 16 in action, they don’t want to go back.

Automatic Voter Registration

Our estimates have found that up to 7.6 million eligible voters are missing from the electoral registers in England and Wales. Numbers vary across constituencies but in the worst areas, up to a fifth of potential voters may not be on the register. Automatic registration would see electoral administrators populate the register from existing data sources before confirming with voters and ensure fewer voters miss out on their chance to participate.

Constituency boundaries

One of the impacts of incomplete electoral rolls is that, with parliamentary boundaries drawn on the basis of registered electors, constituency boundaries are not truly representative of their populations and not all citizens or eligible electors are counted. We support boundaries being based on more accurate data to truly reflect constituency size.

Repeal Voter ID rules

Since the introduction of voter ID, over 40,000 potential voters have been turned away from polling stations and not returned. And that’s just those we know about. Many more have stayed at home and for some voters, such as those with a disability, the scheme has had a greater impact.  Voter ID is putting up another barrier to people who are already likely to be less engaged in democracy and may already find it difficult to participate. This disproportionate and unnecessary policy should be scrapped. If the Voter ID requirement is not removed, significant changes should be made, such as expanding the types of accepted ID and allowing for declarations on the day.

Cleaning up political finance

A fifth of all major political donations in the two decades between 2001 and 2021 came from just 10 individuals. With party finding so reliant on so few there is a real risk that our politics can be bought by the highest bidder. We need a level playing field, where all voters feel they have a stake in our democracy not just those with the deepest pockets. There is also much that can be done to improve transparency and protect our democracy from foreign funding such as introducing a risk-based ‘know-your-donor’ policy; closing the loopholes around donations from unincorporated associations and improving transparency on donations and spending.

Strengthen enforcement

For any rules to be effective, we need effective enforcement and monitoring. We are strongly opposed to ministerial involvement in setting the Electoral Commission’s strategy as part of the ‘Strategy and Policy Statement’ introduced in the Elections Act 2022. The Electoral Commission should have the powers it needs to obtain and share information to ensure compliance and there should be an increase in the maximum fine it is able to levy.

Fair votes

Ultimately addressing disengagement and disempowerment means giving voice to voters and to their local communities and this cannot happen without also making changes at Westminster. After the most disproportional election in British electoral history, it is time our political system valued every vote and every voter in every part of the country and moved to a proportional electoral system.

For Mayors too, moving from a preferential system to FPTP was a huge mistake in the last Elections Bill and one that could be righted with a move back to the Supplementary Vote (SV) or to the Alternative Vote (AV).

We need to rebuild our democracy to put it on stronger foundations for the future and ensure everyone can participate. The Elections Bill is an opportunity to begin this process and we will be calling on the government to ensure it does just that.

A key moment to improve our democracy

This Elections Bill represents a welcome opportunity to modernise our democracy and restore public confidence in the political process. By expanding participation, improving transparency, and strengthening oversight, the government can help ensure that our elections are fair, inclusive, and fit for the 21st century.

But reforms on paper are only the beginning – what matters is meaningful action. As the Bill moves through Parliament, we’ll be watching closely to ensure it delivers on its promises and truly puts voters at the heart of our democracy.

You can support our work by joining as a member

As momentum builds for electoral reform, your support is more important than ever. Our members support our work in parliament like this, as well as in the press and online – making the case, and backing it up – for how we can fix Westminster’s broken system.

Support us today from just £2 a month

New research published last month by Dr Tom Barton at Kings College London shows the potential detrimental effect of new voter ID laws on turnout. The research shows that the Voter ID requirement deterred and effectively disenfranchised an estimated 10,571 potential voters, who otherwise would have voted in the 2018 Bromley local elections, where voter ID was trialled. Up until this research we have only had Electoral Commission data on the number of people turned away for not bringing ID or bringing incorrect ID to the GE polls (16,000) and post-election polling suggesting that  4% of people did not vote due to voter ID requirements.

Voters stay at home, so don’t appear on official tallies

For this new research Barton analysed historical turnout trends at local elections in Bromley and Greater London as a whole, to produce an estimate of the likely turnout in Bromley at the 2018 local elections if the voter ID trial had not taken place. He estimates that of the 240,249 people who were registered to vote in local election in Bromley, on the south-west outskirts of Greater London, in 2018, 4.4% of these potential voters did not vote due to the Voter ID requirement but otherwise would have done, approximately 460 per ward. The number of voters who were recorded turned away at the polls due to lack of ID in Bromley in 2018 was 154. Barton states the “large difference between the two figures implies that voter ID laws reduce turnout by deterring people who lack ID rather than catching the unaware.” There may be other contributing factors which deter a voter, however Bartons research has shown that voter ID certainly contributes to a decreased turnout.

The number of voters per ward this affects is likely to change depending on socio-demographic factors of the ward, therefore there will be an unequal distribution of potential voters deterred from voting across wards. Due to this, Barton highlights that it is possible for the number of potential voters deterred from voting due to the Voter ID requirement to have an impact on the outcome of the election at ward level.

The Bromley voter ID pilots allowed for either one form of photographic ID to be presented e.g. passport or driving license, or two forms of non-photographic ID, e.g. bank card or poll card. The pilot also allowed for the use of a Returning Officer issued certificate of identity, similar to the Voter Authority Certificate now used. Only one person produced a certificate of identity in Bromley. The most frequent form of ID shown was a driving licence (54%), a passport (24%) and a freedom pass (15%). Of the non-photo ID, the most used was a poll card with 3% of people presenting this.

Either scrap, or massively expand the list of acceptable ID

The Bromley pilots had a range of options for ID aimed at ensuring that as many people as possible were not turned away due to lack of ID, yet the estimated effect on turnout is still staggering. In order to not undermine the accessibility of our elections and eliminate this hidden effect on turnout which Barton has brought to light, the requirement for Voter ID must be scrapped.

However, as signalled by Democracy Minister, Rushanara Ali MP, getting rid of voter ID is not “on the table”. At the very least there must be big changes to the voter ID requirement, to include vouching, attestation, widely expanding the list of accepted IDs and including non-photographic IDs such as poll cards and bank cards to help minimise the impact of voter ID on turnout.

What cards do you think the government should accept? Take our survey →

Since 2023, we’ve had to present a valid form of photo ID to vote in UK-wide elections, and municipal elections in England.

With the introduction of the scheme, the UK has taken a wrong turn when it comes to democratic progress. Here are the key reasons why it’s a scheme that desperately needs to be scrapped – or at minimum, massively re-assessed.

There was never a justification for introducing Voter ID

There’s one thing that needs to be made clear about Voter ID: it’s always been unnecessary. 

With 16,000 voters blocked from casting their ballots in the 2024 General Election because they did not bring an acceptable form of ID to the polling station, you’d really hope that there was a strong reason for introducing these regulations to begin with.  

But that’s far from the case. There’s never been an evidence-based justification for the introduction of Voter ID in the UK. It’s always been a solution looking for a problem. 

The then-Conservative government said, in 2023, that Voter ID was needed for “stamping out the potential for voter fraud”. But thankfully, voter fraud hasn’t been an issue in UK elections.

To put it into perspective: in elections held in 2019, 58 million votes were cast. There were only 33 cases of alleged impersonation at the polling station. That’s 0.000057% of all votes. And out of this already miniscule fraction, there was only one conviction.

Yet due to Voter ID, we’ve seen 40,000 people turned away from polling stations since the scheme was first introduced. The government stopped tens of thousands of us from voting, all in the name of stopping a handful of people from losing their votes to fraud.  

And it’s not as if there was an issue with public confidence in elections, either. Before the heavy-handed Voter ID scheme was introduced, 80% of us were confident that our elections are well run, and 87% of us said voting in general is safe from fraud and abuse.

So perhaps there was another rationale? One former minister involved in bringing in the rules made it quite clear what he thought the point of the policy was. And it wasn’t fighting fraud.

Voter ID creates a barrier for some people, but doesn’t affect others 

In the UK, the more wealthy you are, the more likely you are to have ID. Voter ID rules have been found to disproportionately disadvantage those of us who might already be having a tough time.

That means that mandatory Voter ID has built barriers to voting for those of us who might not have a passport because we can’t afford a foreign holiday; or who can’t drive, so don’t have a driving license. And research commissioned by the last government also found that those with severely limiting disabilities, the unemployed, people without qualifications, and those who had never voted before were all less likely to hold any form of photo ID. In fact, research published in 2021 found that 2% of us don’t have any form of photo ID whatsoever.  

Voter ID means that for some portions of the public, there’s now a barrier blocking their route to participation. People who have the democratic right to vote are being unfairly left behind by these regulations – just because they’re less likely to have ID. 

Citizens are being turned away 

In a modern democracy, we should be taking steps to improve participation, not making it more difficult to vote, because participation is the fuel that democracies run on. In the 2024 General Election, we saw the second lowest turnout on record. This lack of participation is a real problem that the Government should be working on. 

So the fact that Voter ID rules have blocked thousands of us from participating, with 16,000 people turned away at polling stations in the 2024 General Election, shows that Voter ID has been a huge step in the wrong direction. Those thousands of citizens were willing and ready to cast their vote: their participation should have been encouraged and nurtured, not denied on a technicality.

From police officers to nurses, we’ve heard from a number of citizens who’ve contributed to our society their whole lives, only to be denied the right to have their say at the polling station because they didn’t have the right ID. 

The Government should be standing up for our right to have our voices heard instead of making it harder to take part in democracy. 

It’s time to re-assess the voter ID scheme 

In a democracy, voting is a fundamental right. And at a time when turnout is faltering, it should be encouraged, not restricted.

At minimum, the government must expand the types of ID people can use at polling stations. But in reality, as this is a scheme which has caused far more harm than good, the best course of action is for it to be scrapped completely.

Support our work: become a member today

Since voter ID was imposed in 2023, we know voters have been turned away from polling stations over 40,000 times and not returned. This alone is a shocking enough fact, but that’s not even the full picture.

This figure is likely only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the damaging impact it has had on our democracy, as it won’t account for people who simply stayed at home on polling day as they did not have an accepted form of ID. In short, voter ID has already prevented tens of thousands of people casting their vote, leaving them excluded from decisions that affect them, and adding to a general sense of disconnect with our democracy.

So, it was deeply disheartening to see the government’s democracy minister, Rushanara Ali, saying this week that she has no plans to scrap voter ID. Asked at a select committee on Tuesday whether ending voter ID was “on the table”, the minister said:

“No, it’s not. What we are focused on is improving the system and making sure that we look at what else we can do in relation to voter ID, and getting those legitimate voters who are excluded included.”

Voter ID was always a solution in search of a problem

Ever since the previous government suggested the idea of demanding people present ID at polling stations, we have opposed it as an unnecessary barrier to people casting votes they are entitled to. The question from the start was what problem was voter ID solving?

In the UK the levels of impersonation fraud – people pretending to be someone else at a polling station to cast a vote – are vanishingly small (In 2019, the last general election without ID in place, there were only 33 allegations). The truth is that voter ID has always been a solution in search of a problem, and since its introduction has created problems that weren’t there before.

Even members of the government that brought it in have openly admitted they now think voter ID was a terrible idea. Jacob Rees-Mogg, a cabinet office minister and business secretary under the last government, told the National Conservatism Conference in 2023 that voter ID was an act of ‘gerrymandering’ that ‘upset a system that worked perfectly well’.

A fresh call for modernising democracy came last week from the people that run our elections.

The Association of Electoral Administrators (AEA) have published a new report, New Blueprint for a Modern Electoral Landscape: How to bring resilience and capacity to UK democracy. The body, which represents Electoral Administrators across the UK, condemned the UK’s current electoral system, likening it to trying to operate in the 21^st century using 19^th century infrastructure.

They highlight how the disjointed approach to electoral law has led to a disjointed electoral landscape, which is becoming with every reform, “more complex […] increasingly difficult to understand, navigate and administer.” And it’s not only the administrators that are struggling with the current state of the system, electors are often left feeling “frustrated or disappointed”.

This new report called for dozens of recommendations to strengthen and improve democracy from both the administrator and voter perspective, including everything from registration to polling day.

The ERS welcomes various recommendations in the report specifically the calls for:

Make voting days more flexible

Flexible voting, which would allow people to vote across multiple days, including the weekend and anywhere in their local authority would improve the accessibility of polling stations. It would move our voting system inline with the way we move through our lives, giving us more options for when and where we vote.

Imagine a nurse, with an irregular work pattern who works at a hospital on the other side of their local authority from where they live. On polling day, they miss out on voting as on they cannot get to their designated polling station before it closes. Under a system of flexible voting, not only could they have voted on a day which they weren’t at work, they could have popped out on their lunch break to a polling station near their work or even managed to nip into one closer to work on their way home. Voting should be built around how we live – there is no reason for people to be denied the right to vote because of logistics.

Exploring automatic voter registration

It may seem normal to us, but why do we have to register to vote? It’s a legal requirement to be on the electoral roll, so it’s not like we have an option to not register. Many other countries have adopted automatic or more automated registration; isn’t it time the UK caught up? The AEA supports exploring the use of automatic and or more automated registration, something which we have long campaigned for. Not only would this help with the accuracy and completeness of the register, but it would remove an unnecessary barrier to voting. People that regularly move house such as young people, minority ethnic groups, people in lower DE socio-economic groups and people in privately rented accommodation tend to drop off the register, and only realise when it is too late.

Consolidating and standardising electoral law across the UK

The AEA noted that electoral law is difficult to navigate and fragmented across various Acts and statutory instruments, leaving electoral officials piecing together different bits of law to create a full picture of electoral law. They call for a consolidation of this law under a single Electoral Administration Act. Not only would this simplify navigation for administrators, but it would also bring together the national differences in election law in one document; whilst respecting the differences between the nations.

Reviewing the list of ID you can use to vote

The Elections Act 2022 introduced the requirement for photo ID to vote for the first time. Since the outset we have been adamantly against requiring voters to present photo ID to vote and have campaigned tirelessly for a U-turn on this unnecessary policy. However, if a complete U-turn is not possible, extending the list of accepted IDs is non-negotiable if we’re going to try to mitigate the negative effects of Voter ID.

The AEA has also identified that the list of accepted Voter ID needs to be extended, and the potential to include a digitally issued ID or voter authority certificate so that a physical ID is not mandatory. Voter ID has not had equal effects on all demographic groups, we know that voters over the age of 85, those with severely limiting disabilities, the unemployed, people without qualifications, those who had never voted before and people in lower DE socio-economic groups are less likely to hold ID. A number of these groups are less likely to turn out to vote in the first place. Hopefully, by increasing the number of accepted IDs and introducing a digital ID this barrier will be lessened if it is not eliminated.

Reviewing impact of Election Acts on different demographic groups

It’s not only Voter ID which has had an unequal impact on different demographic groups, the AEAs report highlighted the “unintended challenges” some groups are facing due to the Elections Act. They use the example of care home residents who, due to “the limit on how many applications each year a person may attest for absent vote and VAC [Voter Authority Certificates ] applications, combined with new identity verification requirements, had negative impacts for some care home residents”. A full review of the Elections Act 2022 should be undertaken to ensure that no demographic group is unequally impacted due to the changes.

Elections should be organised around the way we live our lives today, not stuck in a rut set in the Victorian age. The AEA’s recommendations would be a good start.

Do you care about the quality of our democracy?

Join the ERS today

Voter ID has risen back up the political agenda after the Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner, last week confirmed the government is going to “look at” whether to scrap the requirements. Since 2023, people have had to show a form of approved identification at polling stations for most elections to cast their ballot. Ever since the idea was mooted, we have campaigned against it as an unnecessary barrier being that would prevent people casting votes they are entitled to.  

In the UK the levels of personation fraud – people pretending to be someone else at a polling station to cast a vote – are vanishingly small. 

Sadly, our concerns have been realised over the last few years as we have seen more than 40,000 people turned away from polling stations over the last two local elections and the general election. This figure is likely to be the tip of the iceberg as it doesn’t capture people who, for instance, simply stayed at home on polling day as they lacked an accepted form of ID. 

Voter ID creates absurd situations 

Over the last few elections, we’ve seen the voter ID rules create numerous absurd situations. For example, in last year’s local elections, former PM Boris Johnson – who introduced the legislation – was turned away from a polling station for not having ID. A decorated former army officer, who served Afghanistan and Northern Ireland, was also turned away as his veterans’ card wasn’t accepted as ID, something the government has since moved to amend.  

We’ve also heard personal stories from scores of voters, including police officers and nurses, who have been turned away from polling stations as their professional IDs were not accepted at polling stations. 

 We and other democracy campaigners have continued to argue that voter ID is having a disproportionate and damaging impact on our democracy by preventing thousands of people from voting, while solving no discernible problem.

Therefore, it was encouraging to hear the Deputy Prime Minister saying at a select committee hearing last week:  

 “The one thing I would say is that in all of the reports that we’ve had in the past, in terms of electoral fraud [it] is very, very, very, very minor. 

“And, therefore, we want to enfranchise people into exercising their vote and we’ll look at voter ID as part of that.”  

Democracy on a worrying trajectory 

This comes as we have just seen the second lowest turnout in a general election on record while trust in politics is at a record low. It’s clear our democracy is headed on a worrying trajectory and the government needs to take urgent action to set it on a healthier course. In a modern democracy, we should be removing barriers and expanding access to voting, not imposing new barriers that make it harder for people to participate in their democracy. 

Voting is a fundamental right and one person being prevented from casting a vote they are entitled to is one too many. At the bare minimum, the government should vastly expand the types of ID people can use at polling stations, but ultimately this damaging policy needs to be scrapped. 

Do you think that voter ID needs to be scrapped? Add your name.