What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
A few points: 1. People are not cheating in voting at polling stations. 2. The electoral fraud which had been identified was with *postal* voting which does not require ID 3. So the solution was created for a problem that doesn't exist as a distraction from a problem that does exist. 4. I assume that you think it quite coincidental that all of the people being disenfranchised - the poor, the young - are least likely to vote Conservative.
People always support their opponents being banned from voting. The common sense thing for anyone who is genuinely non-partisan is to find an easy way to allow everyone to vote regardless of who they support.
They look similar, but to get one the holder has had to prove their identity and to get the other they haven't.
As people should realise by now, becuase we've discussed it enough times.
The owner has to 'prove' their identity in both cases.
Not in anywhere near the same way. Do I need to repost the screenshots FPT to prove again how you're being disingenuous?
You need to provide:
Active email address Student enrolment ID from your school, college or university London borough address Digital photo which must be a .jpg, .bmp or .gif file and less than 6MB You pay an administration fee of £20 using a credit or debit card.
We'll post your 18+ Student Oyster photocard to you ***once your school, college or university has approved your application***.
Actually rather a lot of things you and indeed your college need to provide to prove your identity – they might be different to a passport, just as a passport is different to a driving licence.
Yet to claim one doesn't need to prove one's Identity to get a Student Oyster isdemonstrable garbage.
Funny old world.
I’m touched by your faith that the university system is a paragon of virtue
Aha! So now being shown that your post was completely untrue you move the goalposts.
I'm certain many people have also gained passports and driving licences illegally. Yet strangely you don't mention that.
It really is a funny old world.
I think you and I have different views on what constitutes proof.
Me: provide the necessary ID directly to the person doing the verification
You: rely on someone who you have never met and who may or may not have done their job
I agree that I am assuming that the DVLA and the passport office generally conduct their business in a controlled fashion and are more reliable than XY or Z at the Anabob College of Further Education
Surely though getting a false student registration and student oyster card is sufficient obstacle to prevent impostors, even if less substantive than a passport?
The thing I find bizarre is that these organised in-person voting fraudsters who have: - information on the electoral roll - information on who is not going to vote - vast teams of people able to do the actual fraudulent voting while avoiding (at least more than a few) repeated trips to the same polling station - analysis enabling effective targetting of the seats that can be swung in their favour will nonetheless be defeated by an inability to produce fake ID of one of many different forms good enough to fool the person at the polling station (who may have little interest in the process, little time and possibly no exposure to what genuine forms of all the IDs should look like, keeping in mind that expired IDs, possibly with differences to current versions, can also be valid).
It may stop B A Knob from taking his elderly senile neighbour's vote for the lolz, but stopping Fraudcorp from turning a seat or an election? I can't see it.
It was a problem that doesn't exist (3 court cases in the last 12 years) while ignoring a problem (postal voting) that really does exist but little is done about because it's advantageous to the Tories.
Microsoft and Activision are not happy with the UK competition authorities.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-65378617 ..."The report's conclusions are a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects. We will reassess our growth plans for the UK. Global innovators large and small will take note that - despite all its rhetoric - the UK is clearly closed for business."..
Microsoft and Activision are not happy with the UK competition authorities.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-65378617 ..."The report's conclusions are a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects. We will reassess our growth plans for the UK. Global innovators large and small will take note that - despite all its rhetoric - the UK is clearly closed for business."..
Just imagine if you're a shareholder in Activision, you're going to be feeling sicker than a cyclist with piles right now.
Microsoft and Activision are not happy with the UK competition authorities.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-65378617 ..."The report's conclusions are a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects. We will reassess our growth plans for the UK. Global innovators large and small will take note that - despite all its rhetoric - the UK is clearly closed for business."..
Not “Closed for Business”, closed to anti-competitive mergers and acquisitions, that threaten hundreds of skilled jobs and rising prices for consumers.
Given how much fraud has been observed in the student enrolment process (dodgy higher education colleges faking immigration) it seems entirely reasonable that it is not deemed a reasonable proof of eligibility to vote.
The senior card requires a passport or drivers licence. Do you understand why that might be deemed as a higher quality piece if ID?
Why do we need ID at all? This absurd policy, transparently launched for party political advantage, led to this:
Yet still the PB Tories go out to bat for it. I wonder why?
Two reasons:
1. The Electoral Commission recommended it 2. The franchise must been seen to be protected as well as being protected
This is not an unreasonable ask. It is not an imposition. It is a fairly basic measure of security. The government have provided a large number of potential alternatives.
(And, yes, we should tighten up postal voting as well)
The Electoral Commission did not specifically recommend PHOTO ID.
Does anyone really think that if the Conservatives didn't think they would benefit from this that they would be pushing it through without any attempt at cross-party consensus, and rejecting amendments made the House of Lords?
Bearing in mind that registration to vote requires no photo, and there is no means to check on a photo is the right person, why is a photo required for this scheme?
Why not a recent utility* bill and a bank card for example?
*one reason I have stuck to paper bills is to prove ID and address.
Requiring people to show their mailed in voting card or ID would entirely deal with this issue, to the extent it is an issue.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
And if the impact is 100 less dodgy votes at the price of 100,000 valid votes lost?
When I applied for my first passport, I had to get my application verified, and a statement that the photo was a true likeness by someone...
...my tutor at university.
Each time I have renewed, it is on the back of that original submission.
So is that any different to a student with a bus pass, verified by their tutor?
To get that passport you also have to provide an original birth certificate and nowadays proof of your parents immigration status. But yes there is always an element of trust at the origin of these documents, that is implicitly carried over in the future.
The logic is like this.
Over 60s pass: had to go through the Passport Office, DVLA, or Post Office and provide original documents.
Over 18s pass: fill in a web form, someone at a school gives the okay.
Now maybe that over 18s pass should be enough, but pretending they are the same is just plain daft.
Honestly this entire stupid argument is making me increasingly in favour of mandatory ID cards.
If this was truly about election integrity then postal voting would have also been cracked down at the same time but since it hasn't Mike's comments are fair.
If it were truly about fairness, they'd have done a far better job of crafting and introducing the regulations.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
When I applied for my first passport, I had to get my application verified, and a statement that the photo was a true likeness by someone...
...my tutor at university.
Each time I have renewed, it is on the back of that original submission.
So is that any different to a student with a bus pass, verified by their tutor?
To get that passport you also have to provide an original birth certificate and nowadays proof of your parents immigration status. But yes there is always an element of trust at the origin of these documents, that is implicitly carried over in the future.
The logic is like this.
Over 60s pass: had to go through the Passport Office, DVLA, or Post Office and provide original documents.
Over 18s pass: fill in a web form, someone at a school gives the okay.
Now maybe that over 18s pass should be enough, but pretending they are the same is just plain daft.
Honestly this entire stupid argument is making me increasingly in favour of mandatory ID cards.
I wonder if that is the plan? Find an issue that the Government can leverage into making ID cards possible?
They look similar, but to get one the holder has had to prove their identity and to get the other they haven't.
As people should realise by now, becuase we've discussed it enough times.
The owner has to 'prove' their identity in both cases.
Not in anywhere near the same way. Do I need to repost the screenshots FPT to prove again how you're being disingenuous?
You need to provide:
Active email address Student enrolment ID from your school, college or university London borough address Digital photo which must be a .jpg, .bmp or .gif file and less than 6MB You pay an administration fee of £20 using a credit or debit card.
We'll post your 18+ Student Oyster photocard to you ***once your school, college or university has approved your application***.
Actually rather a lot of things you and indeed your college need to provide to prove your identity – they might be different to a passport, just as a passport is different to a driving licence.
Yet to claim one doesn't need to prove one's Identity to get a Student Oyster isdemonstrable garbage.
Funny old world.
I’m touched by your faith that the university system is a paragon of virtue
Aha! So now being shown that your post was completely untrue you move the goalposts.
I'm certain many people have also gained passports and driving licences illegally. Yet strangely you don't mention that.
It really is a funny old world.
I think you and I have different views on what constitutes proof.
Me: provide the necessary ID directly to the person doing the verification
You: rely on someone who you have never met and who may or may not have done their job
I agree that I am assuming that the DVLA and the passport office generally conduct their business in a controlled fashion and are more reliable than XY or Z at the Anabob College of Further Education
Surely though getting a false student registration and student oyster card is sufficient obstacle to prevent impostors, even if less substantive than a passport?
At about the time these rules were being promulgated there was an industry wide scandal of fake colleges providing false papers to allow people to work illegally while claiming to be students. I would assume that influenced the government’s thinking and its very possible they never revisited the issue.
They look similar, but to get one the holder has had to prove their identity and to get the other they haven't.
As people should realise by now, becuase we've discussed it enough times.
The owner has to 'prove' their identity in both cases.
Not in anywhere near the same way. Do I need to repost the screenshots FPT to prove again how you're being disingenuous?
You need to provide:
Active email address Student enrolment ID from your school, college or university London borough address Digital photo which must be a .jpg, .bmp or .gif file and less than 6MB You pay an administration fee of £20 using a credit or debit card.
We'll post your 18+ Student Oyster photocard to you ***once your school, college or university has approved your application***.
Actually rather a lot of things you and indeed your college need to provide to prove your identity – they might be different to a passport, just as a passport is different to a driving licence.
Yet to claim one doesn't need to prove one's Identity to get a Student Oyster isdemonstrable garbage.
Funny old world.
I’m touched by your faith that the university system is a paragon of virtue
Aha! So now being shown that your post was completely untrue you move the goalposts.
I'm certain many people have also gained passports and driving licences illegally. Yet strangely you don't mention that.
It really is a funny old world.
I think you and I have different views on what constitutes proof.
Me: provide the necessary ID directly to the person doing the verification
You: rely on someone who you have never met and who may or may not have done their job
I agree that I am assuming that the DVLA and the passport office generally conduct their business in a controlled fashion and are more reliable than XY or Z at the Anabob College of Further Education
Surely though getting a false student registration and student oyster card is sufficient obstacle to prevent impostors, even if less substantive than a passport?
The thing I find bizarre is that these organised in-person voting fraudsters who have: - information on the electoral roll - information on who is not going to vote - vast teams of people able to do the actual fraudulent voting while avoiding (at least more than a few) repeated trips to the same polling station - analysis enabling effective targetting of the seats that can be swung in their favour will nonetheless be defeated by an inability to produce fake ID of one of many different forms good enough to fool the person at the polling station (who may have little interest in the process, little time and possibly no exposure to what genuine forms of all the IDs should look like, keeping in mind that expired IDs, possibly with differences to current versions, can also be valid).
It may stop B A Knob from taking his elderly senile neighbour's vote for the lolz, but stopping Fraudcorp from turning a seat or an election? I can't see it.
Quite: In reality the majority of actual cases of electoral fraud have revolved around fraudulent postal votes. Stangely this government doesn’t seem very interested in reforming the postal vote system. Can’t think why.
Have there been fraudulent votes cast in person at polling stations? Maybe - but if we think this is a real problem then surely we should try and find out what’s actually happening on the ground first?
Following on from @Carlotta's latest update on the Trans wars I ended up with the report commissioned by the University of Essex following their withdrawal of invitations to two speakers who were apparently transphobic.
The report is within this link (itself an apology for the invitation withdrawal) and all is well and good, inclusion this, freedom of speech that.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
A few points: 1. People are not cheating in voting at polling stations. 2. The electoral fraud which had been identified was with *postal* voting which does not require ID 3. So the solution was created for a problem that doesn't exist as a distraction from a problem that does exist. 4. I assume that you think it quite coincidental that all of the people being disenfranchised - the poor, the young - are least likely to vote Conservative.
People always support their opponents being banned from voting. The common sense thing for anyone who is genuinely non-partisan is to find an easy way to allow everyone to vote regardless of who they support.
That's not quite true: it also disenfranchises some old people, who no longer drive or have a passport. (Albeit most of these will have bus passes.)
What makes it so egregious is that there are many things which could be done that would stop personation dead, while not disenfranchising groups that are younger, poorer, etc.
When I applied for my first passport, I had to get my application verified, and a statement that the photo was a true likeness by someone...
...my tutor at university.
Each time I have renewed, it is on the back of that original submission.
So is that any different to a student with a bus pass, verified by their tutor?
To get that passport you also have to provide an original birth certificate and nowadays proof of your parents immigration status. But yes there is always an element of trust at the origin of these documents, that is implicitly carried over in the future.
The logic is like this.
Over 60s pass: had to go through the Passport Office, DVLA, or Post Office and provide original documents.
Over 18s pass: fill in a web form, someone at a school gives the okay.
Now maybe that over 18s pass should be enough, but pretending they are the same is just plain daft.
Honestly this entire stupid argument is making me increasingly in favour of mandatory ID cards.
I wonder if that is the plan? Find an issue that the Government can leverage into making ID cards possible?
Imagine the epidemic of apoplexy across the community who object to phone warnings or low traffic neighbourhoods...
They look similar, but to get one the holder has had to prove their identity and to get the other they haven't.
As people should realise by now, becuase we've discussed it enough times.
The owner has to 'prove' their identity in both cases.
Not in anywhere near the same way. Do I need to repost the screenshots FPT to prove again how you're being disingenuous?
You need to provide:
Active email address Student enrolment ID from your school, college or university London borough address Digital photo which must be a .jpg, .bmp or .gif file and less than 6MB You pay an administration fee of £20 using a credit or debit card.
We'll post your 18+ Student Oyster photocard to you ***once your school, college or university has approved your application***.
Actually rather a lot of things you and indeed your college need to provide to prove your identity – they might be different to a passport, just as a passport is different to a driving licence.
Yet to claim one doesn't need to prove one's Identity to get a Student Oyster isdemonstrable garbage.
Funny old world.
I’m touched by your faith that the university system is a paragon of virtue
Aha! So now being shown that your post was completely untrue you move the goalposts.
I'm certain many people have also gained passports and driving licences illegally. Yet strangely you don't mention that.
It really is a funny old world.
I think you and I have different views on what constitutes proof.
Me: provide the necessary ID directly to the person doing the verification
You: rely on someone who you have never met and who may or may not have done their job
I agree that I am assuming that the DVLA and the passport office generally conduct their business in a controlled fashion and are more reliable than XY or Z at the Anabob College of Further Education
When I applied for my first passport, I had to get my application verified, and a statement that the photo was a true likeness by someone...
...my tutor at university.
Each time I have renewed, it is on the back of that original submission.
So is that any different to a student with a bus pass, verified by their tutor?
That’s only part of the verification process for a passport
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
And if the impact is 100 less dodgy votes at the price of 100,000 valid votes lost?
It's a price worth paying ... so long as they're not 'our' votes.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
A few points: 1. People are not cheating in voting at polling stations. 2. The electoral fraud which had been identified was with *postal* voting which does not require ID 3. So the solution was created for a problem that doesn't exist as a distraction from a problem that does exist. 4. I assume that you think it quite coincidental that all of the people being disenfranchised - the poor, the young - are least likely to vote Conservative.
People always support their opponents being banned from voting. The common sense thing for anyone who is genuinely non-partisan is to find an easy way to allow everyone to vote regardless of who they support.
They are not being banned from voting.
They are being asked to provide photo ID
Two entirely different things - it’s only partisans who used emotive words like “banned” and “disenfranchised” or “suppression”.
Following on from @Carlotta's latest update on the Trans wars I ended up with the report commissioned by the University of Essex following their withdrawal of invitations to two speakers who were apparently transphobic.
The report is within this link (itself an apology for the invitation withdrawal) and all is well and good, inclusion this, freedom of speech that.
It seems the university is claiming that those sections contained personal testimony which, if published, would a) identify the individuals concerned and b) break the confidentiality guarantees that had been offered when the evidence was given.
Both of which are claimed as valid legal grounds for redaction.
It would probably have been sensible for them to have said this in the first place when they published the document.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
That is extremely specious by Sky News - Bridgen quoted someone (afaicr some sort of medical consultant) comparing vaccines to the holocaust. That story implies he stated it as his own opinion. Even Bridgen deserves his actions to be reported truthfully.
If this was truly about election integrity then postal voting would have also been cracked down at the same time but since it hasn't Mike's comments are fair.
If it were truly about fairness, they'd have done a far better job of crafting and introducing the regulations.
That’s rather assuming a certain level of competence…
When I applied for my first passport, I had to get my application verified, and a statement that the photo was a true likeness by someone...
...my tutor at university.
Each time I have renewed, it is on the back of that original submission.
So is that any different to a student with a bus pass, verified by their tutor?
To get that passport you also have to provide an original birth certificate and nowadays proof of your parents immigration status. But yes there is always an element of trust at the origin of these documents, that is implicitly carried over in the future.
The logic is like this.
Over 60s pass: had to go through the Passport Office, DVLA, or Post Office and provide original documents.
Over 18s pass: fill in a web form, someone at a school gives the okay.
Now maybe that over 18s pass should be enough, but pretending they are the same is just plain daft.
Honestly this entire stupid argument is making me increasingly in favour of mandatory ID cards.
Well mandatory IDs would be fairer in terms of voting. The costs for ID are also cheaper for older vs younger, and lower admin as they move far less than youngsters have to. In an era where the main political dividing line is age, if they really wanted to do this the least they could have done is to make passports and driving licenses free.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
That is extremely specious by Sky News - Bridgen quoted someone (afaicr some sort of medical consultant) comparing vaccines to the holocaust. That story implies he stated it as his own opinion. Even Bridgen deserves his actions to be reported truthfully.
On the whole he deserves being ignored completely.
I wonder if that is the plan? Find an issue that the Government can leverage into making ID cards possible?
I wouldn't mind. It's one of those "uniquely British" things that seems to be mainly an anachronism and inconvenience that creates a whole load of other problems.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
And if the impact is 100 less dodgy votes at the price of 100,000 valid votes lost?
I think that is probably the correct order of magnitude for both.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
A few points: 1. People are not cheating in voting at polling stations. 2. The electoral fraud which had been identified was with *postal* voting which does not require ID 3. So the solution was created for a problem that doesn't exist as a distraction from a problem that does exist. 4. I assume that you think it quite coincidental that all of the people being disenfranchised - the poor, the young - are least likely to vote Conservative.
People always support their opponents being banned from voting. The common sense thing for anyone who is genuinely non-partisan is to find an easy way to allow everyone to vote regardless of who they support.
They are not being banned from voting.
They are being asked to provide photo ID
Two entirely different things - it’s only partisans who used emotive words like “banned” and “disenfranchised” or “suppression”.
I don't understand the anger at Voter ID, voting is a very important function of democracy, whats the hardship of providing ID to be able to vote. Try getting into a City Centre pub on a Friday night without ID. My firend who is 45 got asked for ID when buying a trowel set at B & Q. Having ID is part of modern day life.
Given how much fraud has been observed in the student enrolment process (dodgy higher education colleges faking immigration) it seems entirely reasonable that it is not deemed a reasonable proof of eligibility to vote.
The senior card requires a passport or drivers licence. Do you understand why that might be deemed as a higher quality piece if ID?
Why do we need ID at all? This absurd policy, transparently launched for party political advantage, led to this:
Yet still the PB Tories go out to bat for it. I wonder why?
Two reasons:
1. The Electoral Commission recommended it 2. The franchise must been seen to be protected as well as being protected
This is not an unreasonable ask. It is not an imposition. It is a fairly basic measure of security. The government have provided a large number of potential alternatives.
(And, yes, we should tighten up postal voting as well)
The Electoral Commission did not specifically recommend PHOTO ID.
Does anyone really think that if the Conservatives didn't think they would benefit from this that they would be pushing it through without any attempt at cross-party consensus, and rejecting amendments made the House of Lords?
Bearing in mind that registration to vote requires no photo, and there is no means to check on a photo is the right person, why is a photo required for this scheme?
Why not a recent utility* bill and a bank card for example?
*one reason I have stuck to paper bills is to prove ID and address.
Utility bills would definitely favour older voters over younger voters as well.
If this is really important, just make passports and driving licenses free.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
That is extremely specious by Sky News - Bridgen quoted someone (afaicr some sort of medical consultant) comparing vaccines to the holocaust. That story implies he stated it as his own opinion. Even Bridgen deserves his actions to be reported truthfully.
On the whole he deserves being ignored completely.
I tend to agree - he's by all accounts not a great MP and a less than pleasant character who has now found a second career as a put-upon vaccine martyr.
However, the fact remains that the story is inaccurate in a key way, one that seeks to magnify Bridgen's offence, presumably to justify his expulsion from the Tory party.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
Because right now, it's much easier for some people to prove who they are than others they are. That could be changed, but only if the UK overcame its ID card phobia.
That might bias the results away from on the true will of the people. And having to jump through different sized hoops looks unfair.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
[Bridgen] said: "My expulsion from the Conservative Party under false pretences only confirms the culture of corruption, collusion and cover-ups which plagues our political system.
ETA following our discussion of rhetorical devices, note the list of three and extensive use of alliteration. Hyperbole is in the eye of the beholder!
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
If there are enough obstacles put in the way of voting then the people prevented from voting no longer live in a democracy. People who don't live in a democracy may behave in ways that people don't like. What a sad situation we are in.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
That is extremely specious by Sky News - Bridgen quoted someone (afaicr some sort of medical consultant) comparing vaccines to the holocaust. That story implies he stated it as his own opinion. Even Bridgen deserves his actions to be reported truthfully.
When I quote someone it's usually to support my own view - don't most of us do that?
It will be interesting if he does join RefUK, giving them a Parliament slot. In principle that would give him more coverage than the actual leadership (just as Caroline Lucas gets more than the Green leadership), and I wonder if a mighty Budgen-Tice battle battle awaits keen punters to consider in the future?
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
I have neither driving licence nor passport. Does the Prime Minister think I'm a fool? (Recently I did apply for a voter authority certificate.)
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
A few points: 1. People are not cheating in voting at polling stations. 2. The electoral fraud which had been identified was with *postal* voting which does not require ID 3. So the solution was created for a problem that doesn't exist as a distraction from a problem that does exist. 4. I assume that you think it quite coincidental that all of the people being disenfranchised - the poor, the young - are least likely to vote Conservative.
People always support their opponents being banned from voting. The common sense thing for anyone who is genuinely non-partisan is to find an easy way to allow everyone to vote regardless of who they support.
That's not quite true: it also disenfranchises some old people, who no longer drive or have a passport. (Albeit most of these will have bus passes.)
What makes it so egregious is that there are many things which could be done that would stop personation dead, while not disenfranchising groups that are younger, poorer, etc.
Whilst I wholly accept that some older people may not have ID, they are highly likely to be postal voting already.
Personation at the ballot box is such a non-issue according to the official figures that nothing was needed to stop it. How do you act to stop something which is not occurring?
Even the "this was recommended by the Electoral Commission" line is a distortion. They *did not* recommend a rushed implementation which could - and now has - disenfranchised many voters. They said the exact opposite, and were ignored by the government.
Why? Because this is a very specific exercise to stop people voting for parties who aren't the Tories.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
That is extremely specious by Sky News - Bridgen quoted someone (afaicr some sort of medical consultant) comparing vaccines to the holocaust. That story implies he stated it as his own opinion. Even Bridgen deserves his actions to be reported truthfully.
When I quote someone it's usually to support my own view - don't most of us do that?
It will be interesting if he does join RefUK, giving them a Parliament slot. In principle that would give him more coverage than the actual leadership (just as Caroline Lucas gets more than the Green leadership), and I wonder if a mighty Budgen-Tice battle battle awaits keen punters to consider in the future?
I often quote people to be annoyingly pedantic.
Like asking who this 'Budgen' guy is in the possible "Budgen-Tice battle"
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
A few points: 1. People are not cheating in voting at polling stations. 2. The electoral fraud which had been identified was with *postal* voting which does not require ID 3. So the solution was created for a problem that doesn't exist as a distraction from a problem that does exist. 4. I assume that you think it quite coincidental that all of the people being disenfranchised - the poor, the young - are least likely to vote Conservative.
People always support their opponents being banned from voting. The common sense thing for anyone who is genuinely non-partisan is to find an easy way to allow everyone to vote regardless of who they support.
They are not being banned from voting.
They are being asked to provide photo ID
Two entirely different things - it’s only partisans who used emotive words like “banned” and “disenfranchised” or “suppression”.
If I do not have valid photo ID I cannot vote. If I turn up at the polling station I would find I would be banned from voting.
So many of these voters *have* photo ID. But the Tories have chosen to disallow them. "ah but its a less strict process to apply for a student citizenship card than a pensioner one" was the excuse quoted above.
OK. So we start from the reality - the measured and officially reported fact - that there is almost no fraud committed by imposters at the polling station. The non-existent person wanting to fraudulently vote would have had to apply for student ID to get the Student photo card. Which they aren't doing as they don't exist.
So in choosing to disallow so many of the photo IDs that students have, and insisting on ID they likely do not have, which banning them from voting if they can't produce one, how can you object to the word banned?
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
That is extremely specious by Sky News - Bridgen quoted someone (afaicr some sort of medical consultant) comparing vaccines to the holocaust. That story implies he stated it as his own opinion. Even Bridgen deserves his actions to be reported truthfully.
On the whole he deserves being ignored completely.
I tend to agree - he's by all accounts not a great MP and a less than pleasant character who has now found a second career as a put-upon vaccine martyr.
However, the fact remains that the story is inaccurate in a key way, one that seeks to magnify Bridgen's offence, presumably to justify his expulsion from the Tory party.
It isn't inacurate though. The tweet (here's an image showing the deleted Tweet) was: "As one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust."
That's endorsement. It's not "one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust" or "one consultant cardiologist said to me, 'this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust'", which would be different as you say. The 'as' and lack of any qualification, indicates explicit endorsement, does it not?
What on earth is meant by "voter suppression"? Why on earth should people who can't prove who they who they say they are be allowed to cheat in voting? You need identification to pick up a parcel or rent a car, why is this any different? It's totally non-partisan and neutral, just common sense and tightening up electoral security, if you ask me.
A few points: 1. People are not cheating in voting at polling stations. 2. The electoral fraud which had been identified was with *postal* voting which does not require ID 3. So the solution was created for a problem that doesn't exist as a distraction from a problem that does exist. 4. I assume that you think it quite coincidental that all of the people being disenfranchised - the poor, the young - are least likely to vote Conservative.
People always support their opponents being banned from voting. The common sense thing for anyone who is genuinely non-partisan is to find an easy way to allow everyone to vote regardless of who they support.
They are not being banned from voting.
They are being asked to provide photo ID
Two entirely different things - it’s only partisans who used emotive words like “banned” and “disenfranchised” or “suppression”.
I don't understand the anger at Voter ID, voting is a very important function of democracy, whats the hardship of providing ID to be able to vote. Try getting into a City Centre pub on a Friday night without ID. My firend who is 45 got asked for ID when buying a trowel set at B & Q. Having ID is part of modern day life.
They have ID. Which are accepted as proof of age. But not for voting.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
More pertinently, what use are more police if criminals are not being brought to justice?
To be honest I think SKS has a number of positives that have drawn me into the Labour column. He comes across as dependable, decent, hardworking, reasonable. Yes, dull, but maybe I want dull over the nutters the Tory Party have thrown at us over the last few years.
Other Labour figures might not have managed to convert me. Nandy for instance I often think overrated.
Starmer does however suffer from a slightly sanctimonious tone and a lack of clear vision which does hold him back and could still cause him problems in a GE campaign, IMHO. I do not think he is a Blair, unifying all behind him in the “Political Wing Of The British People”.
He doesn’t have to be a Blair to win. But I don’t think he’s sealed the deal fully yet.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
They have also not replaced the PCSOs, which limits the ability to do community led intelligence or run deterrence operations.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
To be honest I think SKS has a number of positives that have drawn me into the Labour column. He comes across as dependable, decent, hardworking, reasonable. Yes, dull, but maybe I want dull over the nutters the Tory Party have thrown at us over the last few years.
Other Labour figures might not have managed to convert me. Nandy for instance I often think overrated.
Starmer does however suffer from a slightly sanctimonious tone and a lack of clear vision which does hold him back and could still cause him problems in a GE campaign, IMHO. I do not think he is a Blair, unifying all behind him in the “Political Wing Of The British People”.
He doesn’t have to be a Blair to win. But I don’t think he’s sealed the deal fully yet.
My critique of Starmer, which is a nice problem for Labour to have compared to Corbyn, is that I can see him winning one term; but not two.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
I'd imagine, though more limited in scope in terms of nationality status than the equivalent Afghan evacuation, that there is still some variation in the exact nationality profiles of the evacuees.
I wonder if any tracking will be done, by government or from outside, of how those arriving from Sudan are handled once in the UK.
@AndrewSparrow 16s Tory former attorney general Geoffrey Cox accuses government of 'deliberate breach' of international law obligations with illegal migration bill -
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
Basic mathematical error. The correct answer is of course 20,000
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
Basic mathematical error. The correct answer is of course 20,000
Diane Abbott could sort them out here, and she's looking for a new job...
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
That is extremely specious by Sky News - Bridgen quoted someone (afaicr some sort of medical consultant) comparing vaccines to the holocaust. That story implies he stated it as his own opinion. Even Bridgen deserves his actions to be reported truthfully.
When I quote someone it's usually to support my own view - don't most of us do that?
It will be interesting if he does join RefUK, giving them a Parliament slot. In principle that would give him more coverage than the actual leadership (just as Caroline Lucas gets more than the Green leadership), and I wonder if a mighty Budgen-Tice battle battle awaits keen punters to consider in the future?
Farage-Carswell wasn't a tension free relationship iirc.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
When the plan to hire 20,000 new police was mooted, it was ridiculed on the following grounds
1) increasing recruitment in the police is impossible, since there is nowhere to train them* 2) such an influx of new officers risked ruining the ethos of the police force.
*when reducing police numbers, the police directed recruits into the Specials and to become PCSOs. So there were, in fact a mass of already trained officers waiting to join - in many areas the Specials and PCSOs had, themselves, waiting lists for those wishing to join.
To be honest I think SKS has a number of positives that have drawn me into the Labour column. He comes across as dependable, decent, hardworking, reasonable. Yes, dull, but maybe I want dull over the nutters the Tory Party have thrown at us over the last few years.
Other Labour figures might not have managed to convert me. Nandy for instance I often think overrated.
Starmer does however suffer from a slightly sanctimonious tone and a lack of clear vision which does hold him back and could still cause him problems in a GE campaign, IMHO. I do not think he is a Blair, unifying all behind him in the “Political Wing Of The British People”.
He doesn’t have to be a Blair to win. But I don’t think he’s sealed the deal fully yet.
My critique of Starmer, which is a nice problem for Labour to have compared to Corbyn, is that I can see him winning one term; but not two.
That depends on whether he grows into the job or not. It is hard to tell who will make a good PM. Some recent examples….
To be honest I think SKS has a number of positives that have drawn me into the Labour column. He comes across as dependable, decent, hardworking, reasonable. Yes, dull, but maybe I want dull over the nutters the Tory Party have thrown at us over the last few years.
Other Labour figures might not have managed to convert me. Nandy for instance I often think overrated.
Starmer does however suffer from a slightly sanctimonious tone and a lack of clear vision which does hold him back and could still cause him problems in a GE campaign, IMHO. I do not think he is a Blair, unifying all behind him in the “Political Wing Of The British People”.
He doesn’t have to be a Blair to win. But I don’t think he’s sealed the deal fully yet.
My critique of Starmer, which is a nice problem for Labour to have compared to Corbyn, is that I can see him winning one term; but not two.
It very much depends if the Tories go all 1997-2005 in opposition. I think going back to a more traditional leadership model, with Sunak staying on as LOTO could serve them well, if he has managed honour in any defeat.
I'd imagine, though more limited in scope in terms of nationality status than the equivalent Afghan evacuation, that there is still some variation in the exact nationality profiles of the evacuees.
I wonder if any tracking will be done, by government or from outside, of how those arriving from Sudan are handled once in the UK.
They’re not direct flights from Sudan to UK.
The flight that just landed, was AZ4820, a charter from Larnaca (Cyprus) to Stansted.
The flights out of Sudan, were military transport aircraft from Khartoum airbase to RAF Akrotiri (Cyprus).
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
Driver fpt - when I said:
Doing something about postal voting needed to be first, not next.
It is ludicrous to clamp down on a crime that is not committed and to ignore one that is committed regularly.
You said:
That would have been preferable - better would have been to do both at the same time.
That's still not a reason not to do this.
Well I think you are wrong. How many other procedures and wasted time and money do you want put in place for crimes that aren't committed. I'm sure we could find some medieval crimes and set up Police departments to catch non existent criminals.
The point is you are wasting time, money and resources to stop a crime that frankly doesn't happen and in the process disenfranchising lots of voters
I'd imagine, though more limited in scope in terms of nationality status than the equivalent Afghan evacuation, that there is still some variation in the exact nationality profiles of the evacuees.
I wonder if any tracking will be done, by government or from outside, of how those arriving from Sudan are handled once in the UK.
They’re not direct flights from Sudan to UK.
The flight that just landed, was AZ4820, a charter from Larnaca (Cyprus) to Stansted.
The flights out of Sudan, were military transport aircraft from Khartoum airbase to RAF Akrotiri (Cyprus).
To be honest I think SKS has a number of positives that have drawn me into the Labour column. He comes across as dependable, decent, hardworking, reasonable. Yes, dull, but maybe I want dull over the nutters the Tory Party have thrown at us over the last few years.
Other Labour figures might not have managed to convert me. Nandy for instance I often think overrated.
Starmer does however suffer from a slightly sanctimonious tone and a lack of clear vision which does hold him back and could still cause him problems in a GE campaign, IMHO. I do not think he is a Blair, unifying all behind him in the “Political Wing Of The British People”.
He doesn’t have to be a Blair to win. But I don’t think he’s sealed the deal fully yet.
My critique of Starmer, which is a nice problem for Labour to have compared to Corbyn, is that I can see him winning one term; but not two.
He doesn't need to. He can be replaced after three or four years, especially given his age.
His job was to salvage the party from the depths of their worst result in 84 years. If he gets them into power at all he's achieved what most of us would have sworn was impossible.
Admittedly, with a little help from his friends Johnson and Truss.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
One thing, out of date ID is acceptable
Its all a bit bizarre but there are 1m people who would get a £1,000 fine for expired driving licenses if the police cared. Which they won't if your middle class, middle aged and polite but might do if you are young, lippy and part of the precariat. Another silly example of how to rig the system.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
No, but if you're stopped by the police and you don't have it you might need to take it to a police station later, so...
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
Basic mathematical error. The correct answer is of course 20,000
Duh yes, I meant zero increase. There are not 20k more officers however you cut it.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
When the plan to hire 20,000 new police was mooted, it was ridiculed on the following grounds
1) increasing recruitment in the police is impossible, since there is nowhere to train them* 2) such an influx of new officers risked ruining the ethos of the police force.
*when reducing police numbers, the police directed recruits into the Specials and to become PCSOs. So there were, in fact a mass of already trained officers waiting to join - in many areas the Specials and PCSOs had, themselves, waiting lists for those wishing to join.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
When the plan to hire 20,000 new police was mooted, it was ridiculed on the following grounds
1) increasing recruitment in the police is impossible, since there is nowhere to train them* 2) such an influx of new officers risked ruining the ethos of the police force.
*when reducing police numbers, the police directed recruits into the Specials and to become PCSOs. So there were, in fact a mass of already trained officers waiting to join - in many areas the Specials and PCSOs had, themselves, waiting lists for those wishing to join.
Why. Would the new recruits not be racist and rapey enough?
On the subject of the thread, I note that two years ago The Daily Signal surveyed 47 countries in Europe and the UK was the only one that didn't require voter ID (apart, of course, from Northern Ireland which has had voter ID for over 20 years).
The fact that prosecutions for voter impersonation are low doesn't really tell us anything. An offender can only be prosecuted when they are found out and there is adequate evidence. There may be many cases of voter impersonation that are never detected. After all, if you know that Mr Brown never votes, you are unlikely to be detected if you turn up at the polling station pretending to be him. In my view, we don't really know the size of the problem.
Maybe I am wrong, but I struggle to see voter ID as an evil voter suppression plot.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
You can't go anything thsse days without ID of some sort.
I'd imagine, though more limited in scope in terms of nationality status than the equivalent Afghan evacuation, that there is still some variation in the exact nationality profiles of the evacuees.
I wonder if any tracking will be done, by government or from outside, of how those arriving from Sudan are handled once in the UK.
They’re not direct flights from Sudan to UK.
The flight that just landed, was AZ4820, a charter from Larnaca (Cyprus) to Stansted.
The flights out of Sudan, were military transport aircraft from Khartoum airbase to RAF Akrotiri (Cyprus).
I know it’s a wild assumption, but I would assume that the usual passport or residency checks occurred on the commercial flight inbound to the UK.
They seem to be using the Cyprus base as a staging point. Evacuate people to there, then sort them out for civilian flights to the U.K.?
Yes, SOP for evacuation flights.
The first priority, is to avoid putting any more people in danger than need to be.
The second priority, is to get everyone somewhere safe that you control.
The third priority, is maximising use of the scarce military assets for the dangerous part of the journey.
When Afghanistan was evacuated, the mil aircraft dropped everyone at mil airfields in Bahrain or Dubai, then went back to Afghanistan for more people. Various military and government agencies in the Gulf then sorted the arrivals, according to nationality and destination.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
Driver fpt - when I said:
Doing something about postal voting needed to be first, not next.
It is ludicrous to clamp down on a crime that is not committed and to ignore one that is committed regularly.
You said:
That would have been preferable - better would have been to do both at the same time.
That's still not a reason not to do this.
Well I think you are wrong. How many other procedures and wasted time and money do you want put in place for crimes that aren't committed. I'm sure we could find some medieval crimes and set up Police departments to catch non existent criminals.
The point is you are wasting time, money and resources to stop a crime that frankly doesn't happen and in the process disenfranchising lots of voters
I don't believe that it's not committed, given stories that have been told of people who have lost their vote in such circumstances yet don't appear in official statistics because the police aren't interested in recording it as a crime, let alone investigating it.
Interesting, in the context of Zelensky's chat with Xi. Don't quite know what to make if this, but worth noting.
China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1651188280946466827
China is not the most reliable of interlocutors, to put it mildly, but they do have a hefty amount of influence on Russia.
Not overly bothered by needing ID to vote, people will get used to it. Seems these are a good set of elections for a test and then any issues can be ironed out before important elections that people care about, like Police and Crime Commissioners...
Interesting, in the context of Zelensky's chat with Xi. Don't quite know what to make if this, but worth noting.
China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1651188280946466827
China is not the most reliable of interlocutors, to put it mildly, but they do have a hefty amount of influence on Russia.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
No, but if you're stopped by the police and you don't have it you might need to take it to a police station later, so...
I can't understand why people are getting worked up about this. People know what ID is. Voting is an important, not frivolous activity. ID is needed for a lot less important activities than voting. Those that say that Tories have used this as voter suppression are suggesting that the non-Tory vote is more stupid than the Tory one. At one time I might have agreed with that suggestion. Not so sure now.
Interesting, in the context of Zelensky's chat with Xi. Don't quite know what to make if this, but worth noting.
China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1651188280946466827
China is not the most reliable of interlocutors, to put it mildly, but they do have a hefty amount of influence on Russia.
If Xi told Putin to withdraw from Ukraine, I suspect Putin would have to comply.
Did anyone post what happened to the Japanese moon effort ?
https://spacenews.com/first-ispace-lunar-lander-feared-lost/ ...In a statement issued about six hours later, ispace said that, during the lander’s final approach to the surface, “estimated remaining propellant reached at the lower threshold and shortly afterward the descent speed rapidly increased,” suggesting that the lander ran out of propellant, causing its engines to shut down prematurely. Controllers then lost contact with the lander...
To be honest I think SKS has a number of positives that have drawn me into the Labour column. He comes across as dependable, decent, hardworking, reasonable. Yes, dull, but maybe I want dull over the nutters the Tory Party have thrown at us over the last few years.
Other Labour figures might not have managed to convert me. Nandy for instance I often think overrated.
Starmer does however suffer from a slightly sanctimonious tone and a lack of clear vision which does hold him back and could still cause him problems in a GE campaign, IMHO. I do not think he is a Blair, unifying all behind him in the “Political Wing Of The British People”.
He doesn’t have to be a Blair to win. But I don’t think he’s sealed the deal fully yet.
My critique of Starmer, which is a nice problem for Labour to have compared to Corbyn, is that I can see him winning one term; but not two.
It very much depends if the Tories go all 1997-2005 in opposition. I think going back to a more traditional leadership model, with Sunak staying on as LOTO could serve them well, if he has managed honour in any defeat.
They could do worse with Sunak remaining leader but I suspect that there will be a civil war and they won’t have a great time in their first term of opposition, but we’ll see.
The big challenge the Tory Party will face if it is defeated next year is that it will need to work out what it is for, particularly as the current brand of Toryism has been discredited.
Brexit (or the Tory version of it at least) is seen to be a mess.
Economic policy hasn’t worked.
Public services are in crisis.
The immigration system is still deeply unsatisfactory.
Personally I think they’ll disappear down a culture war rabbit hole, DeSantis style, and whilst that in and of itself might actually chime with some of the general public’s sensibilities, like Willie Hague and his Quest To Save The Pound, it won’t be enough for them to build an electoral comeback.
Their only route back after 1 term is if Labour completely and utterly balls things up so totally and comprehensively that people think there’s no choice but to return to the Tories. I am not sure how great a Labour government will be, but chances that they won’t be quite so shockingly awful, even if they can’t rise to the challenges we face.
Interesting, in the context of Zelensky's chat with Xi. Don't quite know what to make if this, but worth noting.
China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1651188280946466827
China is not the most reliable of interlocutors, to put it mildly, but they do have a hefty amount of influence on Russia.
If Xi told Putin to withdraw from Ukraine, I suspect Putin would have to comply.
Siberia has some lovely resources, it would be very tempting to take a closer look while you're army is distracted 10,000 miles away.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
You can't go anything thsse days without ID of some sort.
What a complete and utter load of stinking horseshit.
You do need ID occasionally – the notion you need it daily, even weekly, is garbage.
Interesting, in the context of Zelensky's chat with Xi. Don't quite know what to make if this, but worth noting.
China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1651188280946466827
China is not the most reliable of interlocutors, to put it mildly, but they do have a hefty amount of influence on Russia.
If Xi told Putin to withdraw from Ukraine, I suspect Putin would have to comply.
Siberia has some lovely resources, it would be very tempting to take a closer look while you're army is distracted 10,000 miles away.
Hopefully not. We are all far less likely to die if Xi just trades chips for mining concessions.
I see the government has reached its target for 20,000 new police officers, a pledge made in the 2019 manifesto.
That's pretty shocking. Govt makes good on manifesto pledge is not something you see every day.
If only the police's reputation wasn't in the gutter this might have positive polling implications for the Cons. It still might.
They’re measuring inputs, rather than outputs.
20,000 more officers working on trivial motoring offences and policing ‘hate crime’ on Twitter - while house burglaries, car thefts and street robberies lead to little interest - isn’t going to go down well with the general public.
There are not 20,000 more officers. If I fire 20,000 cops, then reluctantly hire 20,000 cops over a 12 year period, that is not 20,000 more cops.
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
When the plan to hire 20,000 new police was mooted, it was ridiculed on the following grounds
1) increasing recruitment in the police is impossible, since there is nowhere to train them* 2) such an influx of new officers risked ruining the ethos of the police force.
*when reducing police numbers, the police directed recruits into the Specials and to become PCSOs. So there were, in fact a mass of already trained officers waiting to join - in many areas the Specials and PCSOs had, themselves, waiting lists for those wishing to join.
Why. Would the new recruits not be racist and rapey enough?
Yes.
What the line - “X could stand a good deal of ruination” ?
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
There are a lot of "points of pride for an Englishmen" that should long have been in the dustbin of history; imo this is one of those. Attachment to Agatha Christie - Bertie Wooster World is not worth the many downsides.
The fact that there was only 1 prosecution for voter impersonation does not mean that it is not a problem. The whole point is that we don't know how much it happens, or what size of problem it is, because a lot of it goes undetected. Only hysterical revolutionaries fail to understand this basic common sense fact.
So you consider the disenfranchisement of potentially hundreds of thousands of voters to be a proportional response?
This is Trumpian politics.
Noone has been disenfranchised save for those who are too stupid to have any form of ID. If they don’t have ID, why not?
Passports are £93. Driving licenses you commit a criminal offence if you don't keep the address up to date or renew your photo every 10 years - not great if you are a lodger or flat sharer changing address a couple of times a year.
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
More to the point, for years it was a point of pride that an Englishman (I think was a peculiarly English thing) need never present “papers” to the authorities. I like that old idea. And as noted above, there’s many ways to skin this cat without going back on it.
In the sense of if you're just walking along the street, yes.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
You don’t have to have your driving licence with you when you drive.
No, but if you're stopped by the police and you don't have it you might need to take it to a police station later, so...
I can't understand why people are getting worked up about this. People know what ID is. Voting is an important, not frivolous activity. ID is needed for a lot less important activities than voting. Those that say that Tories have used this as voter suppression are suggesting that the non-Tory vote is more stupid than the Tory one. At one time I might have agreed with that suggestion. Not so sure now.
I agree with the bit in bold.
So why is there no meaningful safeguard for postal voting, which has been the subject of the *only* widespread and serious electoral fraud in this country since the Irish constituencies of the election of 1918?
Comments
1. People are not cheating in voting at polling stations.
2. The electoral fraud which had been identified was with *postal* voting which does not require ID
3. So the solution was created for a problem that doesn't exist as a distraction from a problem that does exist.
4. I assume that you think it quite coincidental that all of the people being disenfranchised - the poor, the young - are least likely to vote Conservative.
People always support their opponents being banned from voting. The common sense thing for anyone who is genuinely non-partisan is to find an easy way to allow everyone to vote regardless of who they support.
How times change and I am very pleased she is attending and more evidence of how to move on for the greater good
https://news.sky.com/story/sinn-feins-michelle-oneill-to-attend-the-coronation-of-king-charles-12866632
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-65378617
..."The report's conclusions are a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects. We will reassess our growth plans for the UK. Global innovators large and small will take note that - despite all its rhetoric - the UK is clearly closed for business."..
From the GB wide YouGov poll the Scotland subsample is
Lab 35%
Con 20%
SNP 19%
Lib Dems 11%
Greens 11%
Plaid Cymru 1%
Others 3%
So that's the SNP in third place, ho ho ho.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/vbxqddbe8g/TheTimes_VI_AdHoc_230419_W.pdf
Nota bene, this is a subsample of 174 so I wouldn't get overly excited, wait for the full Scotland polls.
The logic is like this.
Over 60s pass: had to go through the Passport Office, DVLA, or Post Office and provide original documents.
Over 18s pass: fill in a web form, someone at a school gives the okay.
Now maybe that over 18s pass should be enough, but pretending they are the same is just plain daft.
Honestly this entire stupid argument is making me increasingly in favour of mandatory ID cards.
Andrew Bridgen: MP kicked out of Tory party after comparing COVID vaccines to Holocaust
Mr Bridgen was suspended from the parliamentary Conservative Party following his remarks at the start of this year. He has now been ejected completely from the party.
https://news.sky.com/story/andrew-bridgen-mp-kicked-out-of-tory-party-after-comparing-covid-vaccines-to-holocaust-12866848
Have there been fraudulent votes cast in person at polling stations? Maybe - but if we think this is a real problem then surely we should try and find out what’s actually happening on the ground first?
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/770790/response/1885639/attach/html/3/Response to your FOIA request University of Essex.pdf.html
But it did start the unravelling of “the law according to Stonewall”
https://sex-matters.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Reindorf-Report-Sex-Matters-.docx.pdf
What makes it so egregious is that there are many things which could be done that would stop personation dead, while not disenfranchising groups that are younger, poorer, etc.
They are being asked to provide photo ID
Two entirely different things - it’s only partisans who used emotive words like “banned” and “disenfranchised” or “suppression”.
Both of which are claimed as valid legal grounds for redaction.
It would probably have been sensible for them to have said this in the first place when they published the document.
If this is really important, just make passports and driving licenses free.
However, the fact remains that the story is inaccurate in a key way, one that seeks to magnify Bridgen's offence, presumably to justify his expulsion from the Tory party.
That might bias the results away from on the true will of the people. And having to jump through different sized hoops looks unfair.
ETA following our discussion of rhetorical devices, note the list of three and extensive use of alliteration. Hyperbole is in the eye of the beholder!
It will be interesting if he does join RefUK, giving them a Parliament slot. In principle that would give him more coverage than the actual leadership (just as Caroline Lucas gets more than the Green leadership), and I wonder if a mighty Budgen-Tice battle battle awaits keen punters to consider in the future?
Life is different for different people. The 2m are not stupid (well some are, some aren't just like the rest of us), but they have different lives to a pb regular.
Personation at the ballot box is such a non-issue according to the official figures that nothing was needed to stop it. How do you act to stop something which is not occurring?
Even the "this was recommended by the Electoral Commission" line is a distortion. They *did not* recommend a rushed implementation which could - and now has - disenfranchised many voters. They said the exact opposite, and were ignored by the government.
Why? Because this is a very specific exercise to stop people voting for parties who aren't the Tories.
Like asking who this 'Budgen' guy is in the possible "Budgen-Tice battle"
So many of these voters *have* photo ID. But the Tories have chosen to disallow them. "ah but its a less strict process to apply for a student citizenship card than a pensioner one" was the excuse quoted above.
OK. So we start from the reality - the measured and officially reported fact - that there is almost no fraud committed by imposters at the polling station. The non-existent person wanting to fraudulently vote would have had to apply for student ID to get the Student photo card. Which they aren't doing as they don't exist.
So in choosing to disallow so many of the photo IDs that students have, and insisting on ID they likely do not have, which banning them from voting if they can't produce one, how can you object to the word banned?
"As one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust."
That's endorsement. It's not "one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust" or "one consultant cardiologist said to me, 'this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust'", which would be different as you say. The 'as' and lack of any qualification, indicates explicit endorsement, does it not?
20,000 -20,000 +20,000 = 0
41m
NEW: In a statement Bridgen confirms his intention to stand at the next election
OT: Surprised that this issue continues to get any attention, except for the purely political.
OT: I see that "Not Proven" is on the way out, perhaps. Helpful for Murrell-bagging?
To be honest I think SKS has a number of positives that have drawn me into the Labour column. He comes across as dependable, decent, hardworking, reasonable. Yes, dull, but maybe I want dull over the nutters the Tory Party have thrown at us over the last few years.
Other Labour figures might not have managed to convert me. Nandy for instance I often think overrated.
Starmer does however suffer from a slightly sanctimonious tone and a lack of clear vision which does hold him back and could still cause him problems in a GE campaign, IMHO. I do not think he is a Blair, unifying all behind him in the “Political Wing Of The British People”.
He doesn’t have to be a Blair to win. But I don’t think he’s sealed the deal fully yet.
That's different from having to show ID to do a particular thing, like travel abroad, drive, pick up a parcel or - yes - vote.
I'd imagine, though more limited in scope in terms of nationality status than the equivalent Afghan evacuation, that there is still some variation in the exact nationality profiles of the evacuees.
I wonder if any tracking will be done, by government or from outside, of how those arriving from Sudan are handled once in the UK.
16s
Tory former attorney general Geoffrey Cox accuses government of 'deliberate breach' of international law obligations with illegal migration bill -
His reply was 'finally, the twat.'
I will always speak fondly about Chris Pincher.
He helped precipitate the greatest government crisis in the last century which led to Boris Johnson's resignation.
Pincher deserves a knighthood as a minimum.
1) increasing recruitment in the police is impossible, since there is nowhere to train them*
2) such an influx of new officers risked ruining the ethos of the police force.
*when reducing police numbers, the police directed recruits into the Specials and to become PCSOs. So there were, in fact a
mass of already trained officers waiting to join - in many areas the Specials and PCSOs had, themselves, waiting lists for those wishing to join.
The flight that just landed, was AZ4820, a charter from Larnaca (Cyprus) to Stansted.
The flights out of Sudan, were military transport aircraft from Khartoum airbase to RAF Akrotiri (Cyprus).
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/26/sudan-conflict-news-latest-british-nationals-evacuation-liv/
I know it’s a wild assumption, but I would assume that the usual passport or residency checks occurred on the commercial flight inbound to the UK.
Doing something about postal voting needed to be first, not next.
It is ludicrous to clamp down on a crime that is not committed and to ignore one that is committed regularly.
You said:
That would have been preferable - better would have been to do both at the same time.
That's still not a reason not to do this.
Well I think you are wrong. How many other procedures and wasted time and money do you want put in place for crimes that aren't committed. I'm sure we could find some medieval crimes and set up Police departments to catch non existent criminals.
The point is you are wasting time, money and resources to stop a crime that frankly doesn't happen and in the process disenfranchising lots of voters
His job was to salvage the party from the depths of their worst result in 84 years. If he gets them into power at all he's achieved what most of us would have sworn was impossible.
Admittedly, with a little help from
his friendsJohnson and Truss.Look how 'happy' the Russians are that got exchanged on the other hand.
https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1651226326924247040
The fact that prosecutions for voter impersonation are low doesn't really tell us anything. An offender can only be prosecuted when they are found out and there is adequate evidence. There may be many cases of voter impersonation that are never detected. After all, if you know that Mr Brown never votes, you are unlikely to be detected if you turn up at the polling station pretending to be him. In my view, we don't really know the size of the problem.
Maybe I am wrong, but I struggle to see voter ID as an evil voter suppression plot.
The first priority, is to avoid putting any more people in danger than need to be.
The second priority, is to get everyone somewhere safe that you control.
The third priority, is maximising use of the scarce military assets for the dangerous part of the journey.
When Afghanistan was evacuated, the mil aircraft dropped everyone at mil airfields in Bahrain or Dubai, then went back to Afghanistan for more people. Various military and government agencies in the Gulf then sorted the arrivals, according to nationality and destination.
Don't quite know what to make if this, but worth noting.
China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on political settlement of the Ukraine crisis.
https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1651188280946466827
China is not the most reliable of interlocutors, to put it mildly, but they do have a hefty amount of influence on Russia.
https://spacenews.com/first-ispace-lunar-lander-feared-lost/
...In a statement issued about six hours later, ispace said that, during the lander’s final approach to the surface, “estimated remaining propellant reached at the lower threshold and shortly afterward the descent speed rapidly increased,” suggesting that the lander ran out of propellant, causing its engines to shut down prematurely. Controllers then lost contact with the lander...
The big challenge the Tory Party will face if it is defeated next year is that it will need to work out what it is for, particularly as the current brand of Toryism has been discredited.
Brexit (or the Tory version of it at least) is seen to be a mess.
Economic policy hasn’t worked.
Public services are in crisis.
The immigration system is still deeply unsatisfactory.
Personally I think they’ll disappear down a culture war rabbit hole, DeSantis style, and whilst that in and of itself might actually chime with some of the general public’s sensibilities, like Willie Hague and his Quest To Save The Pound, it won’t be enough for them to build an electoral comeback.
Their only route back after 1 term is if Labour completely and utterly balls things up so totally and comprehensively that people think there’s no choice but to return to the Tories. I am not sure how great a Labour government will be, but chances that they won’t be quite so shockingly awful, even if they can’t rise to the challenges we face.
You do need ID occasionally – the notion you need it daily, even weekly, is garbage.
What the line - “X could stand a good deal of ruination” ?
So why is there no meaningful safeguard for postal voting, which has been the subject of the *only* widespread and serious electoral fraud in this country since the Irish constituencies of the election of 1918?