This afternoon the Commons is debating the Government's controversial #ElectionsBill. This bill will reduce the independence of the Electoral Commission, ban those without the right ID from voting and change the electoral system for Mayors and PCCs electoral-reform.org.uk/the-government…
Banning those without the right sorts of ID from voting could cost up to £180,000,000 a decade, with millions alone being spent on bigger poll cards to explain the complicated rules. Around 2.1 million people lack the necessary ID according to the government’s own research.
Disadvantaged groups, like the unemployed, those renting from a local authority and disabled people are less likely to have ID. The bill expects them to travel to, sometimes distant, local council offices to request alternative forms of ID.
electoral-reform.org.uk/expensive-vote…
The forms of ID that are allowed make it easier for some groups than others - the 60+ Oyster Card will be accepted, but not the 18+ photo Oyster Card. standard.co.uk/news/politics/…
On top of these new rules, the #ElectionsBill will allow the government to set the priorities of the Electoral Commission. Our currently independent elections regulator will have its priorities set by the people it regulates. electoral-reform.org.uk/these-governme…
Finally, the government slipped an amendment in after most scrutiny had happened that will change the way Mayors and PCCs are elected to their benefit. electoral-reform.org.uk/sweeping-undem…
Imposing First Past the Post on London's Mayoral elections will make it easier for a candidate to win with less support - and ignores the referendum that set up the London Mayor and Assembly which saw 72% voting in favour.
The #ElectionsBill debate is scheduled to start at 3.30 and can be watched here parliamentlive.tv/Commons
Most of the #ElectionsBill received no pre-legislative scrutiny and there has been no formal public consultation on the bill as a whole. The third reading is going to start late, reducing what little debate there can be.
The debate on the #ElectionsBill has finally started, three hours later than planned. You can watch it here: parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/ec…
Cat Smith MP has raised the problem of recruiting volunteer poll workers when their role will be expanded to turning voters away.
The Government have gone through the amendments they are proposing and now the Opposition are speaking.
Alex Norris is highlighting the problems those in rural communities will face having to attend distant townhalls to apply for elector cards.
As David Davis MP said earlier today "When you already face problems such as... making sure there’s food on the table, or caring for elderly relatives, finding time to go to the council... will be the least of your worries." opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocra…
Voter ID will result in people being turned away, which could be enough to swing the results on an election. @lloyd_rm highlights the risks
Shadow Minister @AlexNorrisNN is rounding up his introduction to their amendments with a criticism of the way the bill has been produced, with major changes introduced with no consultation "this is a bad bill, with solutions that are looking for problems"
@AlexNorrisNN "It will make it harder for citizens to vote, harder for civil society to contribute - the only winners in here are those with the deepest pockets" @AlexNorrisNN
Next up is Shadow Deputy SNP Spokesperson @BrendanOHaraMP who speaks out against the fundamental threats to our democracy contained in the Elections Bill.
Speaking about the amendments they support, @BrendanOHaraMP highlights the current unfairness in the franchise for 16 and 17 year olds - "Why is it okay for Scotland and Wales, but not okay for England and Northern Ireland?"
Labour MP @CatSmithMP makes an important intervention: rather than restricting access to the vote with voter ID, "one of the ways we can make our democracy more secure is to encourage more people to participate in our democracy", such as by extending the franchise to 16 and 17yos
SNP MP @BrendanOHaraMP is now speaking to the proposed amendment on a Citizens' Assembly on proportional representation - "it wouldn't be a step into the unknown, because citizens' assemblies have been shown to work in Scotland and many democracies in the world use them"
Liberal Democrat Spokesperson @amcarmichaelMP speaking in favour of their amendment on proportional representation for the House of Commons "it is the existence of [safe seats] that without making any real effort creates this sense of entitlement" among MPs at Westminster.
Speaking earlier during the debate, Conservative MP and ERS member @ChrisClarksonMP expresses sympathy with the SNP amendment on a Citizens' Assembly on Proportional Representation, but says he will not be voting for it as part of this bill.
And here is @amcarmichaelMP moving the amendment on proportional representation for elections to the House of Commons - PR would lead to "the restoration of the standing of this House in public life."
Labour's @Valerie_VazMP quoting the ERS's concerns before raising parliamentary opposition to the bill "two committees of the house have said the government have not provided enough evidence for these changes."
Speaking earlier during the debate, Conservative MP and ERS member @ChrisClarksonMP expresses sympathy with the SNP amendment on a Citizens' Assembly on Proportional Representation, but says he will not be voting for it as part of this bill.
"This bill as drafted has almost, absolutely nothing to say about the acute issue of secretive campaign finance filtering into British politics." - @DeidreBrock of the SNP on the issue of the lack of regulation on unincorporated associations funding politics.
Labour's @CatSmithMP on the risk of #voterID versus the low level of fraud: "Ultimately it comes down to what is proportionate [...] is the requirement to show ID proportionate to the scale of the crime that is happening".
.@CatSmithMP continues on the threat posed to the independence of the @ElectoralCommUK by the bill "It is important that the public, that the voters have the confidence in an independent Electoral Commission. The act of this #ElectionsBill will throw this into doubt."

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Electoral Reform Society

Electoral Reform Society Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @electoralreform

Jun 8, 2021
You can explore the proposed boundary changes here
bcereviews.org.uk
We support the principle of equalising boundary sizes, but there should have been more flexibility to help seats reflect actual communities. Allowing up to 10% difference in size between seats would have helped to minimise disruption for voters and MPs.
Reviews should also be based on a more accurate data source than the electoral register, which the Electoral Commission estimated was missing 9.4 million voters. These voters tend to be urban, younger, from lower-income groups, renters, and ethnic minorities.
Read 4 tweets
Jun 7, 2021
Boundary reviews cause so much consternation with MPs as they know, with first past the post, that it is where they fall that will decide whether they win or lose their seat. thetimes.co.uk/article/4d76ba…
We made this graphic a few years ago - but look how control of our fictional town council changes between the reds and the blues as the boundaries move, even though nobody changes their vote.
Thankfully our Independent Boundary Commissions mean the boundaries aren't drawn for partisan advantage, but if we don't want lines on a map to decide our government, we need to abandon the idea that each constituency should elect one MP.
Read 4 tweets
Dec 12, 2020
One year on: 9 things you need to know about the 2019 General Election electoral-reform.org.uk/9-things-you-n…
1. The Conservatives won a big majority… despite only increasing their vote share by 1.3% on 2017
2. Smaller parties got crushed – as usual. Nearly 900,000 votes for the Green Party across the UK equated to exactly one Green MP.

In contrast, it took just 25,000 or so votes to elect an SNP MP (thankfully, both parties back proportional representation!)
Read 10 tweets
Sep 24, 2020
Democracy in the Dark – our new report from two of the UK’s leading election finance academics Dr @KateDommett
and Dr @sampower reveals a major rise in online spending during the 2019 general election – with little transparency over how it was used.
electoral-reform.org.uk/ers-reveals-th…
The £19.5 million the Conservatives raised in the six weeks leading up to the election is greater than the sum total of reported donations to all political parties in 2017 during the same period (Chart: Weekly pre-poll donations over £7,500)
2019 saw big donors that were far more willing to part with their cash than in 2017 – the total reported donations in the run up to the vote topped £30.4 million (All parties, donations over £7,500).
Read 7 tweets
Sep 8, 2020
Hereditary peer by-elections, ludicrous elections where there are sometimes more candidates then voters, were paused during lockdown - peers have now quietly extended the pause hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2020-09-…
Lord Newby: 'Elections were postponed in May and no local council by-elections are being held. If the only election at this point was the hereditary peers by-election in the House of the Lords, it would make us look even more foolish — if that were possible — than we already do'
It's absurd that we guarantee aristocrats seats-for-life in the 21st century. The by-elections must be scrapped as a stepping stone to real reform
Read 4 tweets
Aug 20, 2020
In the US, Black Americans and voters of color are less likely than whites to hold the required ID to vote and therefore are more burdened by voter ID laws, multiple studies have found.
businessinsider.com/voter-identifi…
Rules started to come in in the mid-2010s and 2020s, with claims that such laws were justified to prevent in-person voter impersonation, a type of voter fraud that multiple comprehensive studies have found is vanishingly rare to the point of being almost non-existent.
A 2014 study from Loyola University Law School professor and elections scholar Justin Levitt, for example, found just 31 credible cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014, a time period during which over one billion votes were cast.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(