← Back to Westminster Hall Debates

Voter ID — [Sir Gary Streeter in the Chair]

13 July 2021

Lead MP

Rachel Hopkins
Luton South and South Bedfordshire
Lab

Responding Minister

Chloe Smith

Tags

Crime & Law EnforcementEmploymentDemocracy & ElectionsParliamentary ProcedureLocal Government
Word Count: 9776
Other Contributors: 7

At a Glance

Rachel Hopkins raised concerns about voter id — [sir gary streeter in the chair] in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key Requests to Government:

How does the Minister expect her to explain the introduction of voter ID to her constituents who are more likely to suffer voter suppression because of it, and how will this additional work be undertaken by under-resourced election administrators?

How the Debate Unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:

Lead Contributor

Luton South and South Bedfordshire
Opened the debate
The debate focuses on the Elections Bill which aims to introduce voter identification requirements. Rachel Hopkins is concerned that this legislation poses a threat to democracy, arguing it costs over £40 million over the next decade without addressing an existing problem. She mentions that from 2010 to 2018 there were only five police cautions issued for personation and four convictions in UK polling stations. According to research, 99% of election staff do not think fraud has occurred in their polling stations and 88% of the public think our polling stations are safe.

Government Response

Chloe Smith
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward. I thank the hon. Member for Luton South for bringing forward this debate and all hon. Members who have contributed. The Government is committed to upholding the integrity of our democracy by introducing voter ID to stamp out personation, which is a crime of deception often targeting vulnerable individuals. The Electoral Commission's research shows that residents in diverse areas are at greater risk of electoral fraud. Voter ID virtually eliminates the risk of personation and increases public confidence in voting, as data from pilot evaluations have shown. Lord Pickles' independent review of electoral fraud in 2016 provided evidence for vulnerabilities in our elections, including the introduction of voter identification to address such issues. The Electoral Commission supports this measure, and it is backed by international election observers who have called for its implementation in Great Britain due to security risks. Many other democracies require some form of ID to vote, and showing identification to prove one's identity is a common practice. Cabinet Office research from earlier this year shows that 98% of electors already own the photographic documents proposed. The list of approved photographic forms of identification includes various concessionary travel passes, proof-of-age standard scheme cards, photocard parking permits issued as part of the blue badge scheme, and out-of-date ID will also be accepted if recognisable. Voters without these documents can apply for a free, locally issued voter card from their local authority. We have worked with the Electoral Commission and other stakeholders to ensure that voter identification works for all. Secondary legislation is being introduced to implement this policy properly, building on knowledge from two years of pilots in various local authorities. Comprehensive targeted communications and guidance will be provided by the EC to raise awareness among voters. The Elections Bill also tightens rules for absent voting and clarifies outdated legislation on undue influence of an elector. Modernisation inside polling stations is critical, updating Victorian law to ensure voter identification is done well. Strengthening the integrity of our electoral system gives the public greater confidence that elections will remain secure in the face of modern challenges.
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy

About Westminster Hall Debates

Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.