In response to Ollie Wright: Our votes are precious – we need ID to protect them, Tee2 wrote:
There is a case to be made for verification of identity when voting but I have to say ID cards have always bothered me, they always seem like a precursor to a police state. That may sound a little hysterical but I fear the state would abuse such a system, that it would go from being compulsory to be issued with one to it’s compulsory to carry your card at all times.
In any event, from what I’ve read, most electoral fraud occurs via postal votes where there can be no scrutiny as to the identity of the person putting an ‘X’ in the box. Postal votes should be reserved for a select few who are unable to vote in person on the day, military abroad, disabled etc. At the moment anyone can have a postal vote and it has been widely reported that in certain ‘communities’ many people (women, young, vulnerable, language barriers) will not even see their ballot papers as the head of the family will simply use them as they see fit. It’s no stretch of the imagination to say that in such cases the votes won’t be going to UKIP and it’s no wonder that Labour would oppose any crackdown on such practices, ostensibly because it would be racist to do so but in reality because it might hurt them.
In the majority of instances I don’t suppose many electoral results could have been altered had authorities clamped down on electoral fraud up to now – it is more the democratic principle of the matter that angers – but there are increasingly results in which candidates are elected on a mere handful of votes and if fraud played any part in those, that it is deeply worrying.