On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:23:45 +0000, Coffee
<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:

>On 08/03/2023 03:22, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 03:02:59 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't drive
>>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to have
>>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>>>> validity of the pass).
>>>>>
>>>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>>>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>>
>>> Nobody said they were. You seem to be confused.
>>>
>> I am not confused. If they aren't valid on a bus then why should they
>> be valid for voting?
>> <snip>
>
>"You can still use your photo ID if it's out of date, as long as it
>looks like you."
>
As might also your siblings or even your children.

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:10:45 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 03:02:59 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't drive
>>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to have
>>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>>>> validity of the pass).
>>>>>
>>>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>>>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>>
>>> Nobody said they were. You seem to be confused.
>>>
>> I am not confused. If they aren't valid on a bus then why should they
>> be valid for voting?
>> <snip>
>>
>
>Because they are officially issued photo ID. You don’t stop being you just
>because you are outside the geographic validity of the bus pass.
>
The validity of the document changes, in the case of a bus pass to
being invalid. I have had various forms of official ID issued to me
for specific purposes from time to time but all they generally "prove"
is my name which is not unique.

>Having said all that, there are significant numbers of old folk that don’t
>use buses and haven’t bothered to apply for a pass. My late mother never
>had one. But she could have used her blue badge or expired passport for
>voting.

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:15:45 +0000, Coffee
<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:

>On 08/03/2023 01:58, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't drive
>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to have
>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>
>>>
>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>> validity of the pass).
>>>
>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>
>>> Also, out-of-date photo ID is acceptable, as long as the appearance still
>>> matches.
>>>
>> Some not all, depending on what proof was required for their issue.
>
>My bus pass which is issued by Transport for Wales and has a photograph
>is apparently acceptable.
>
Including in circumstances where legitimate suspicion could arise such
as e.g. turning up to vote somewhere in England.

>My 23 year old friend does not have any acceptable ID.

On 08/03/2023 20:47, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:15:45 +0000, Coffee
> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 08/03/2023 01:58, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't drive
>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to have
>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>>> validity of the pass).
>>>>
>>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>>
>>>> Also, out-of-date photo ID is acceptable, as long as the appearance still
>>>> matches.
>>>>
>>> Some not all, depending on what proof was required for their issue.
>>
>> My bus pass which is issued by Transport for Wales and has a photograph
>> is apparently acceptable.
>>
> Including in circumstances where legitimate suspicion could arise such
> as e.g. turning up to vote somewhere in England. >
>> My 23 year old friend does not have any acceptable ID.

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 13:43:57 +0000, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 08/03/2023 12:29, Coffee wrote:
>> On 08/03/2023 10:40, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <s69f0il61or6ppq5k1fhkm147muctpg10l@4ax.com>, at 21:01:44
>>> on Tue, 7 Mar 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 18:27:38 +0000, Coffee
>>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 07/03/2023 17:10, MB wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 16:21, Coffee wrote:
>>>>>>> Not at all.  The voter suppression in this case is that the
>>>>>>> parties are
>>>>>>> trying to prevent groups of people who don't support them.  In many
>>>>>>> cases this will ethnic minorities particularly the young.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which vote are you claiming is being suppressed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you want all votes open to anyone to vote in, whatever their
>>>>>> nationality and residence?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps you believe in the Irish principle of 'Vote Early, Vote
>>>>>> Often'?
>>>>>
>>>>> The conservatives are requiring voters to show a photo ID when they
>>>>> vote.  It's not been well publicised anyway as you've not heard of it
>>>>> until now you are living proof.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the young and the ethnic minorities who are least likely to have a
>>>>> photo ID.
>>>>
>>>> That's not actually true. The young are the group most likely to have
>>>> some
>>>> form of photo ID, because they can't buy alcohol without it. Getting
>>>> a PASS
>>>> card is pretty much a rite of passage these days (and a PASS card is
>>>> one of
>>>> the accepted forms of voter ID). Young people are used to having ID, and
>>>> don't have any difficulty with using the Internet to register for it.
>>>>
>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't
>>>> drive
>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to
>>>> have
>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>
>>> But many of those will have a twirly card[1]. As far as I can see the
>>> free voter-ID is basically produced through the same process as those
>>> (who also do do blue badges, again acceptable.
>>>
>>> [1] Older Person’s Bus Pass funded by the Government of the UK
>>>      Disabled Person’s Bus Pass funded by the Government of the UK
>>>      Oyster 60+ Card funded by the Government of the United Kingdom
>>>      Freedom Pass
>>>      Scottish National Entitlement Card
>>>      60 and Over Welsh Concessionary Travel Card
>>>      Disabled Person’s Welsh Concessionary Travel Card
>>>      Senior SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>      Registered Blind SmartPass or Blind Person’s SmartPass issued in NI.
>>>      War Disablement SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>      60+ SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>      Half Fare SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>
>>
>> According to that I cannot use my bus pass because mine is funded by the
>> Welsh Government not the Government of the UK.
>
>60 and Over Welsh Concessionary Travel Card (see list above)
>
Aren't Older Persons' bus passes in England funded by local
authorities ? Oyster 60+ cards certainly aren't funded by the UK
government, they are funded by the various local authorities in
Greater London and similar (below national retirement age)
concessionary arrangements elsewhere in England also depend upon local
funding.

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:34:29 +0000, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 08/03/2023 01:19, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 09:29:12 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 08:53:17 +0000
>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 07/03/2023 02:23, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:26:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Those who don't vote don't count; those who tell you to FOAMYOB might
>>>>> vote either way. There is also the aspect that the only poll which
>>>>> counts is the one which all voters have the opportunity to attend,
>>>>> something which only the Westminster government has been actively
>>>>> trying to prevent.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. Voter suppression is something the UK conservatives have in common
>>>> with the US Republicans. Both has their roots in racism.
>>>
>>> Racism? Thats a new one. Are the scots a seperate race from the english then?
>>> I suspect genealogists (not to mention geneticists) would disagree.
>>>
>> Legally Scots are a different race, just as the English are a
>> different race from 'Merkans.
>Neither of those statements is true.
>
You need to tell the courts on both sides of the border.

On 08/03/2023 20:44, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:10:45 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
> <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 03:02:59 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't drive
>>>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to have
>>>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>>>>> validity of the pass).
>>>>>>
>>>>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>>>>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>>>
>>>> Nobody said they were. You seem to be confused.
>>>>
>>> I am not confused. If they aren't valid on a bus then why should they
>>> be valid for voting?
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>
>> Because they are officially issued photo ID. You don’t stop being you just
>> because you are outside the geographic validity of the bus pass.
>>
> The validity of the document changes, in the case of a bus pass to
> being invalid. I have had various forms of official ID issued to me
> for specific purposes from time to time but all they generally "prove"
> is my name which is not unique.
>
>> Having said all that, there are significant numbers of old folk that don’t
>> use buses and haven’t bothered to apply for a pass. My late mother never
>> had one. But she could have used her blue badge or expired passport for
>> voting.

My favourite (mis)use of photo ID was at Diana's funeral. I was working
for Sky at Horseguards. During the rehearsal days leading up to the
event nobody worried about passes but on the day there was a police
cordon and they wanted specific event passes. The OB engineers had
turned up at 0500 to get everything powered up and weren't allowed near
the vehicles. I and the rest of the camera crew turned up at 0600 to be
met with the same problem. Fortunately I had a Sky Sport pass for
working on football. I flashed that and we were let through once I'd
vouched for the others.[1]

[1] "These chaps are with me"
"OK guv, carry on".

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 08/03/2023 20:47, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:15:45 +0000, Coffee
> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 08/03/2023 01:58, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't drive
>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to have
>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>>> validity of the pass).
>>>>
>>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>>
>>>> Also, out-of-date photo ID is acceptable, as long as the appearance still
>>>> matches.
>>>>
>>> Some not all, depending on what proof was required for their issue.
>>
>> My bus pass which is issued by Transport for Wales and has a photograph
>> is apparently acceptable.
>>
> Including in circumstances where legitimate suspicion could arise such
> as e.g. turning up to vote somewhere in England.
>

Which is a thought, bus passes are issued at county or unitary authority
level in England. If I turn up at a polling station in Guildford with a
Southampton bus pass will they call the rozzers?
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 08/03/2023 20:55, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 13:43:57 +0000, Graeme Wall
> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 08/03/2023 12:29, Coffee wrote:
>>> On 08/03/2023 10:40, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <s69f0il61or6ppq5k1fhkm147muctpg10l@4ax.com>, at 21:01:44
>>>> on Tue, 7 Mar 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 18:27:38 +0000, Coffee
>>>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 17:10, MB wrote:
>>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 16:21, Coffee wrote:
>>>>>>>> Not at all.  The voter suppression in this case is that the
>>>>>>>> parties are
>>>>>>>> trying to prevent groups of people who don't support them.  In many
>>>>>>>> cases this will ethnic minorities particularly the young.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which vote are you claiming is being suppressed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you want all votes open to anyone to vote in, whatever their
>>>>>>> nationality and residence?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps you believe in the Irish principle of 'Vote Early, Vote
>>>>>>> Often'?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The conservatives are requiring voters to show a photo ID when they
>>>>>> vote.  It's not been well publicised anyway as you've not heard of it
>>>>>> until now you are living proof.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's the young and the ethnic minorities who are least likely to have a
>>>>>> photo ID.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not actually true. The young are the group most likely to have
>>>>> some
>>>>> form of photo ID, because they can't buy alcohol without it. Getting
>>>>> a PASS
>>>>> card is pretty much a rite of passage these days (and a PASS card is
>>>>> one of
>>>>> the accepted forms of voter ID). Young people are used to having ID, and
>>>>> don't have any difficulty with using the Internet to register for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't
>>>>> drive
>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to
>>>>> have
>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>
>>>> But many of those will have a twirly card[1]. As far as I can see the
>>>> free voter-ID is basically produced through the same process as those
>>>> (who also do do blue badges, again acceptable.
>>>>
>>>> [1] Older Person’s Bus Pass funded by the Government of the UK
>>>>      Disabled Person’s Bus Pass funded by the Government of the UK
>>>>      Oyster 60+ Card funded by the Government of the United Kingdom
>>>>      Freedom Pass
>>>>      Scottish National Entitlement Card
>>>>      60 and Over Welsh Concessionary Travel Card
>>>>      Disabled Person’s Welsh Concessionary Travel Card
>>>>      Senior SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>>      Registered Blind SmartPass or Blind Person’s SmartPass issued in NI.
>>>>      War Disablement SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>>      60+ SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>>      Half Fare SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>>
>>>
>>> According to that I cannot use my bus pass because mine is funded by the
>>> Welsh Government not the Government of the UK.
>>
>> 60 and Over Welsh Concessionary Travel Card (see list above)
>>
> Aren't Older Persons' bus passes in England funded by local
> authorities ? Oyster 60+ cards certainly aren't funded by the UK
> government, they are funded by the various local authorities in
> Greater London and similar (below national retirement age)
> concessionary arrangements elsewhere in England also depend upon local
> funding.

You don't think the guvmint could be telling porkie pies about who pays
for them?
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 08/03/2023 20:56, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:34:29 +0000, Graeme Wall
> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 08/03/2023 01:19, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 09:29:12 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 08:53:17 +0000
>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 07/03/2023 02:23, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:26:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Those who don't vote don't count; those who tell you to FOAMYOB might
>>>>>> vote either way. There is also the aspect that the only poll which
>>>>>> counts is the one which all voters have the opportunity to attend,
>>>>>> something which only the Westminster government has been actively
>>>>>> trying to prevent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. Voter suppression is something the UK conservatives have in common
>>>>> with the US Republicans. Both has their roots in racism.
>>>>
>>>> Racism? Thats a new one. Are the scots a seperate race from the english then?
>>>> I suspect genealogists (not to mention geneticists) would disagree.
>>>>
>>> Legally Scots are a different race, just as the English are a
>>> different race from 'Merkans.
>> Neither of those statements is true.
>>
> You need to tell the courts on both sides of the border.

There is no concept of race, just nationality.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 09:40:30 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:

>On 07.03.23 21:13, Graham Nye wrote:

>> This is a UK group so I'm commenting on English voting (as that's where
>> I live). In nearly 3 decades of voting at the same polling station I
>> haven't recognised any of the polling officials and they haven't
>> recognised me. We are sent a polling card with our name and address on
>> it, but no photo id, but you don't have to vote with it. You can just
>> turn up and claim to be someone.
>
>You would have to turn up with a polling card of someone who is
>plausibly you, and ensure the person you are pretending to be also
>doesn't turn up to vote.

You don't need a polling card to vote. All you need to do, at the moment
(until the requirement for ID comes into force), is to turn up and given
your name and address. And it's easy enough to give someone else's name and
address if you know it.

Obviously, if that person has already voted, then it will show on the list
and you will be denied a ballot paper. So you need to get there before they
do. Hence the cliche about elections in Northern Ireland, before ID was
required there, to "vote early and vote often".

If you cast your fraudulent vote first, and the real voter then turns up
later, they will discover that their vote has been used. In which case, they
can request what's known as a "tendered" ballot paper, which will be counted
but will also be kept aside while the investigation into your fraudulent
vote is carried out. Your fraudulent vote will probably be nullified, but,
if you've been careful about how you went about it, you won't be traced.

On the other hand, if the real voter doesn't turn up to vote at all, then
nobody will ever know that your vote in their name was fraudulent. Given
that turnout ranges from 10% (in some council elections) to around 70% (for
an important referendum), that's fairly good odds in your favour. It's
particularly good odds for local council elections, as these are often
decided by single digit margins of votes and therefore can be swung by a few
determined fraudsters (as, indeed, regularly happened in Northern Ireland).

>It just isn't practical to pull something like that off without getting
>detected, and almost certainly not possible without getting caught.
>Suppose a polling station that on a normal election day gets maybe one
>or two mistakes resulting in a person trying to vote under a name that
>has already voted due to human error, finds by lunchtime, this has
>happened 100 times. By 2pm there will be police hanging around watching
>closely. As you go in again and again to keep casting false votes, your
>face will be noticed, and you will find yourself before a judge.
>
>Basically personnation is just not something that can be done at
>anything like the scale needed to have an impact on the outcome of an
>election.

You're ignoring the fact that it did happen, routinely, in Northern Ireland.
To be fair, part of it was also intimidation of potential witnesses who
might otherwise have grassed up the fraudsters (eg, by telling the police
they'd seen someone they recognised voting in a polling station that was not
their own). So it wouldn't necessarily be easy to replicate to the same
extent on the mainland without the backing of paramilitaries. But, still, it
was effective enough there. And it's not at all impossible here.

Mark

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 18:47:14 +0000, Coffee
<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:

>On 08/03/2023 16:32, Graham Nye wrote:
>> On 2023-03-08 13:30:10, Coffee wrote:
>>>> On 2023-03-08 12:15:45, Coffee wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My 23 year old friend does not have any acceptable ID.
>>>>
>> ...
>>>>
>>> It's applied for but not arrived so I was totally accurate in saying she
>>> does not have an acceptable ID.
>>
>> Accurate, but misleading.
>>
>>> This is a lot of public money being wasted all in the name of
>>> suppressing voters unlikely to vote for the conservatives.
>>
>> The voter suppression claim might be more credible if there wasn't
>> so much publicity for getting a free id (see multiple posts on this
>> subject).
>
>The only publicity I've seen is UK based online news articles and
>presumably TV news broadcasts. Do you seriously think ethnic minorities
>pay these any attention.

If these ethnic minorities (be they in the UK or say, Canada) have the
right to vote -- that is, they're citizens -- then it's incumbent on
them to find out how to exercise that civic duty. And personal
experience tells me governments/agencies fall over backwards to
communicate within specific language media of where/how/why.

I have little sympathy for those who ghetto-ise themselves behind a
language/cultural wall but still expect the benefits (of UK/Canada
etc.) which seemed so attractive in the first place.

A native-born citizen also has the same responsibility.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 08/03/2023 20:47, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:15:45 +0000, Coffee
>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/03/2023 01:58, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't drive
>>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to have
>>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>>>> validity of the pass).
>>>>>
>>>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>>>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>>>
>>>>> Also, out-of-date photo ID is acceptable, as long as the appearance still
>>>>> matches.
>>>>>
>>>> Some not all, depending on what proof was required for their issue.
>>>
>>> My bus pass which is issued by Transport for Wales and has a photograph
>>> is apparently acceptable.
>>>
>> Including in circumstances where legitimate suspicion could arise such
>> as e.g. turning up to vote somewhere in England.
>>
>
>
> Which is a thought, bus passes are issued at county or unitary authority
> level in England. If I turn up at a polling station in Guildford with a
> Southampton bus pass will they call the rozzers?

No, because you can be on the electoral register at more than one place, eg
you own two homes.

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/voter/other-registration-options/voting-and-second-homes

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 09:14:58 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
wrote:

>On Wed, 08 Mar 2023 01:19:59 +0000
>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 09:29:12 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 08:53:17 +0000
>>>Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>On 07/03/2023 02:23, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:26:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Those who don't vote don't count; those who tell you to FOAMYOB might
>>>>> vote either way. There is also the aspect that the only poll which
>>>>> counts is the one which all voters have the opportunity to attend,
>>>>> something which only the Westminster government has been actively
>>>>> trying to prevent.
>>>>
>>>>Yes. Voter suppression is something the UK conservatives have in common
>>>>with the US Republicans. Both has their roots in racism.
>>>
>>>Racism? Thats a new one. Are the scots a seperate race from the english then?
>>>I suspect genealogists (not to mention geneticists) would disagree.
>>>
>>Legally Scots are a different race, just as the English are a
>>different race from 'Merkans. It isn't simply a matter of ancestry or
>>genes (which didn't go too well in the 1940s).
>
>What a load of rubbish.
>
Calling someone e.g. an English or Scottish bastard instead of just a
bastard has changed the nature of the offence for over a quarter of a
century. It took a couple of years or so for the English legal system
(via the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and other legislation) to catch
up with Scotland's (which dealt with it under Common Law) on the
matter.

s.50A Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 - Racially
Aggravated harassment
"“racial group” means a group of persons defined by reference to race,
colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national
origins,"

The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides for comparable effect in
England and Wales.

The offences apply even if the distinguishing feature is perceived
rather than actual (e.g. if you mistakenly call a Geordie a Scottish
bastard).

On 08/03/2023 21:00, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 08/03/2023 20:47, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:15:45 +0000, Coffee
>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/03/2023 01:58, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who
>>>>>>> don't drive
>>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely
>>>>>>> to have
>>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>>>> validity of the pass).
>>>>>
>>>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>>>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>>>
>>>>> Also, out-of-date photo ID is acceptable, as long as the appearance
>>>>> still
>>>>> matches.

As a student I was registered to vote at home and college. The only
restriction was that I couldn't vote twice in a general election.

Are people no longer allowed to be on more than one register?

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:52:39 +0000, Graham Nye <nospam@thenyes.org.uk> wrote:

>On 2023-03-08 09:59:45, Bob wrote:
>
>> The point is there is a very high risk of detection. Even if they have
>> trouble catching you in the act, they will detect what is going on,
>
>Only if the impersonated voter turns up and votes. If they don't, either
>because the fraudster knows in advance they won't vote or the fraudster
>relies on a possibly 2/3rds chance they won't bother, there's no mechanism
>to detect such impersonation. I did mention this yesterday.

In New York in the late 19th century it was common for people to be paid to
vote in the name of recently deceased voters. Similarly, in early 20th
century Ireland, it was, for some time, mainstream opinion that if someone
was known to be unable to vote then it was acceptable to vote on their
behalf provided you voted the way they would have wanted.

>My underlying point is that we don't know how much impersonation there is
>(or isn't) as there is no method of detecting successful impersonation.
>So claims that we don't need to bother with photo id because impersonation
>doesn't occur are not, and cannot be, backed with evidence.

The number of tendered ballot papers (ie, ballot papers issued when someone
turns up to find that their vote has already been cast) used to be around
30,000 in a general election. That was in the 80s and 90s. I can't find more
recent figures; those came from a Hansard transcript of a debate in 1998.
But the figures seemed fairly stable over the elections it was reported for
so there's no reason to believe it will have changed significantly since.

Obviously, not all of those will be actual personation; in some cases it may
well be simple error on the part of either the voter or the poll clerk (eg,
a miscommunication as to the voter's name and address leading to the wrong
elector being ticked off on the list). But it's almost impossible to know
that for certain in most cases. Plus, of course, a tendered ballot will only
hapen if the right person does actually turn up to vote, which not all do.
So the number of tendered ballots understates the number of incorrect votes.

Mark

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 09:18:48 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
wrote:

>On Wed, 08 Mar 2023 01:59:23 +0000
>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 09:27:39 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 02:23:06 +0000
>>>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:26:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>That "below 40%" is when the don't knows/don't cares/FOAMYOB are
>>>>>
>>>>>IOW a standard poll.
>>>>>
>>>>Those who don't vote don't count; those who tell you to FOAMYOB might
>>>>vote either way. There is also the aspect that the only poll which
>>>>counts is the one which all voters have the opportunity to attend,
>>>>something which only the Westminster government has been actively
>>>>trying to prevent.
>>>
>>>You had your "once in a generation" vote. A generation is at least 20-25
>>years.
>>>You don't keep having referendums until you get the vote you want. Perhaps
>>>the SNP should concentrate on actually governing rather than treating scotland
>>
>>>as little more than a platform for their ideology.
>>>
>>There was no "once in a generation" requirement, agreement or
>>qualification.
>
>Discuss with Sturgeon then. She's the one who said it.
>
Several politicians said it but not as a "requirement, agreement or
qualification" except for those who for nefarious purposes attempt to
attach a certain meaning to a phrase which in general usage (e.g.
"once in a lifetime cruise/holiday") mostly fails to deal with a
specific period of time. Amongst the latter there isn't even agreement
on the imaginary length of that imaginary imposition, varying from
e.g. a "political generation" (e.g. the statutory period between
elections) to a human lifetime which is again an uncertain period.

>Referendums like these
>are a Big Deal and cause major uncertainly to business for years beforehand.
>You don't have them every few years
>
Who has?

>just because you think the political winds
>might be blowing in your favour and especially when according to polls little
>has changed since 2014.
>
>Like a lot of people who seem to think once the older generation die things
>will change, nationalists forget that young people become older people and
>their views tend to change along with aging.
>
I think you will find that e.g. French nationalists of all ages had
and still have an aversion to the state next door making an uninvited
visit.

On 08/03/2023 21:13, Nobody wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 18:47:14 +0000, Coffee
> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 08/03/2023 16:32, Graham Nye wrote:
>>> On 2023-03-08 13:30:10, Coffee wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-03-08 12:15:45, Coffee wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> My 23 year old friend does not have any acceptable ID.
>>>>>
>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>> It's applied for but not arrived so I was totally accurate in saying she
>>>> does not have an acceptable ID.
>>>
>>> Accurate, but misleading.
>>>
>>>> This is a lot of public money being wasted all in the name of
>>>> suppressing voters unlikely to vote for the conservatives.
>>>
>>> The voter suppression claim might be more credible if there wasn't
>>> so much publicity for getting a free id (see multiple posts on this
>>> subject).
>>
>> The only publicity I've seen is UK based online news articles and
>> presumably TV news broadcasts. Do you seriously think ethnic minorities
>> pay these any attention.
>
> If these ethnic minorities (be they in the UK or say, Canada) have the
> right to vote -- that is, they're citizens -- then it's incumbent on
> them to find out how to exercise that civic duty. And personal
> experience tells me governments/agencies fall over backwards to
> communicate within specific language media of where/how/why.
>
> I have little sympathy for those who ghetto-ise themselves behind a
> language/cultural wall but still expect the benefits (of UK/Canada
> etc.) which seemed so attractive in the first place.
>
> A native-born citizen also has the same responsibility.

I think most of us here take a great interest in current affairs but
there are others who don't.

One of my cousins is a white UK citizen born and bred. She own no
radio, turns off the TV news, and doesn't read newspapers. All junk
mail goes in the bin unopened and unread. I suspect she is surprised
when polling cards turns up unless someone has mentioned the election to
her.

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 21:25:28 +0000, Coffee
<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:

>On 08/03/2023 21:00, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 08/03/2023 20:47, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:15:45 +0000, Coffee
>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 08/03/2023 01:58, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 22:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 21:01, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who
>>>>>>>> don't drive
>>>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely
>>>>>>>> to have
>>>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But most will have a bus pass (under various names).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, and those are acceptable (all over the UK, not just the area of
>>>>>> validity of the pass).
>>>>>>
>>>>> Bus passes come in different forms and do not have equal status for
>>>>> age verification. None are acceptable "all over the UK" on buses.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, out-of-date photo ID is acceptable, as long as the appearance
>>>>>> still
>>>>>> matches.
>
>As a student I was registered to vote at home and college. The only
>restriction was that I couldn't vote twice in a general election.
>
>Are people no longer allowed to be on more than one register?
>
They are still allowed as there is more than one reason for it such as
e.g. being a student (as someone has mentioned already) and having
more than one residence of which more than one can be "ordinary" along
with the uncertainty of how much time you might spend at each during
the year. There is no fixed definition of "ordinarily resident" and
where you "live" generally needs to be considered in a relevant
context.

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 21:01:50 +0000, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 08/03/2023 20:55, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 13:43:57 +0000, Graeme Wall
>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/03/2023 12:29, Coffee wrote:
>>>> On 08/03/2023 10:40, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <s69f0il61or6ppq5k1fhkm147muctpg10l@4ax.com>, at 21:01:44
>>>>> on Tue, 7 Mar 2023, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 18:27:38 +0000, Coffee
>>>>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 17:10, MB wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 16:21, Coffee wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Not at all.  The voter suppression in this case is that the
>>>>>>>>> parties are
>>>>>>>>> trying to prevent groups of people who don't support them.  In many
>>>>>>>>> cases this will ethnic minorities particularly the young.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which vote are you claiming is being suppressed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you want all votes open to anyone to vote in, whatever their
>>>>>>>> nationality and residence?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps you believe in the Irish principle of 'Vote Early, Vote
>>>>>>>> Often'?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The conservatives are requiring voters to show a photo ID when they
>>>>>>> vote.  It's not been well publicised anyway as you've not heard of it
>>>>>>> until now you are living proof.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's the young and the ethnic minorities who are least likely to have a
>>>>>>> photo ID.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's not actually true. The young are the group most likely to have
>>>>>> some
>>>>>> form of photo ID, because they can't buy alcohol without it. Getting
>>>>>> a PASS
>>>>>> card is pretty much a rite of passage these days (and a PASS card is
>>>>>> one of
>>>>>> the accepted forms of voter ID). Young people are used to having ID, and
>>>>>> don't have any difficulty with using the Internet to register for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The people least likely to have photo ID are older people who don't
>>>>>> drive
>>>>>> and don't have a passport. And they are also the ones most likely to
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> difficulty with an online system for obtaining photo ID.
>>>>>
>>>>> But many of those will have a twirly card[1]. As far as I can see the
>>>>> free voter-ID is basically produced through the same process as those
>>>>> (who also do do blue badges, again acceptable.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] Older Person’s Bus Pass funded by the Government of the UK
>>>>>      Disabled Person’s Bus Pass funded by the Government of the UK
>>>>>      Oyster 60+ Card funded by the Government of the United Kingdom
>>>>>      Freedom Pass
>>>>>      Scottish National Entitlement Card
>>>>>      60 and Over Welsh Concessionary Travel Card
>>>>>      Disabled Person’s Welsh Concessionary Travel Card
>>>>>      Senior SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>>>      Registered Blind SmartPass or Blind Person’s SmartPass issued in NI.
>>>>>      War Disablement SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>>>      60+ SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>>>      Half Fare SmartPass issued in Northern Ireland
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> According to that I cannot use my bus pass because mine is funded by the
>>>> Welsh Government not the Government of the UK.
>>>
>>> 60 and Over Welsh Concessionary Travel Card (see list above)
>>>
>> Aren't Older Persons' bus passes in England funded by local
>> authorities ? Oyster 60+ cards certainly aren't funded by the UK
>> government, they are funded by the various local authorities in
>> Greater London and similar (below national retirement age)
>> concessionary arrangements elsewhere in England also depend upon local
>> funding.
>
>You don't think the guvmint could be telling porkie pies about who pays
>for them?
>
Perish the thought! ;-)

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 21:02:40 +0000, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 08/03/2023 20:56, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:34:29 +0000, Graeme Wall
>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/03/2023 01:19, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 09:29:12 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 08:53:17 +0000
>>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 02:23, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:26:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Those who don't vote don't count; those who tell you to FOAMYOB might
>>>>>>> vote either way. There is also the aspect that the only poll which
>>>>>>> counts is the one which all voters have the opportunity to attend,
>>>>>>> something which only the Westminster government has been actively
>>>>>>> trying to prevent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. Voter suppression is something the UK conservatives have in common
>>>>>> with the US Republicans. Both has their roots in racism.
>>>>>
>>>>> Racism? Thats a new one. Are the scots a seperate race from the english then?
>>>>> I suspect genealogists (not to mention geneticists) would disagree.
>>>>>
>>>> Legally Scots are a different race, just as the English are a
>>>> different race from 'Merkans.
>>> Neither of those statements is true.
>>>
>> You need to tell the courts on both sides of the border.
>
>There is no concept of race, just nationality.
>
Not the wording of the relevant pieces of legislation or previously
the courts' interpretation of "race".

On 08/03/2023 21:22, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 09:14:58 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 08 Mar 2023 01:19:59 +0000
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 09:29:12 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 08:53:17 +0000
>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 07/03/2023 02:23, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:26:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Those who don't vote don't count; those who tell you to FOAMYOB might
>>>>>> vote either way. There is also the aspect that the only poll which
>>>>>> counts is the one which all voters have the opportunity to attend,
>>>>>> something which only the Westminster government has been actively
>>>>>> trying to prevent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. Voter suppression is something the UK conservatives have in common
>>>>> with the US Republicans. Both has their roots in racism.
>>>>
>>>> Racism? Thats a new one. Are the scots a seperate race from the english then?
>>>> I suspect genealogists (not to mention geneticists) would disagree.
>>>>
>>> Legally Scots are a different race, just as the English are a
>>> different race from 'Merkans. It isn't simply a matter of ancestry or
>>> genes (which didn't go too well in the 1940s).
>>
>> What a load of rubbish.
>>
> Calling someone e.g. an English or Scottish bastard instead of just a
> bastard has changed the nature of the offence for over a quarter of a
> century. It took a couple of years or so for the English legal system
> (via the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and other legislation) to catch
> up with Scotland's (which dealt with it under Common Law) on the
> matter.
>
> s.50A Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 - Racially
> Aggravated harassment
> "“racial group” means a group of persons defined by reference to race,
> colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national
> origins,"
>
> The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides for comparable effect in
> England and Wales.
>
> The offences apply even if the distinguishing feature is perceived
> rather than actual (e.g. if you mistakenly call a Geordie a Scottish
> bastard).

In that case you'll have more immediate problems than any legal issues.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 08.03.23 22:25, Mark Goodge wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 12:52:39 +0000, Graham Nye <nospam@thenyes.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-03-08 09:59:45, Bob wrote:
>>
>>> The point is there is a very high risk of detection. Even if they have
>>> trouble catching you in the act, they will detect what is going on,
>>
>> Only if the impersonated voter turns up and votes. If they don't, either
>> because the fraudster knows in advance they won't vote or the fraudster
>> relies on a possibly 2/3rds chance they won't bother, there's no mechanism
>> to detect such impersonation. I did mention this yesterday.
>
> In New York in the late 19th century it was common for people to be paid to
> vote in the name of recently deceased voters. Similarly, in early 20th
> century Ireland, it was, for some time, mainstream opinion that if someone
> was known to be unable to vote then it was acceptable to vote on their
> behalf provided you voted the way they would have wanted.

There are, of course, many ways to attempt to swing an election beyond
simple personnation.

>> My underlying point is that we don't know how much impersonation there is
>> (or isn't) as there is no method of detecting successful impersonation.
>> So claims that we don't need to bother with photo id because impersonation
>> doesn't occur are not, and cannot be, backed with evidence.
>
> The number of tendered ballot papers (ie, ballot papers issued when someone
> turns up to find that their vote has already been cast) used to be around
> 30,000 in a general election. That was in the 80s and 90s. I can't find more
> recent figures; those came from a Hansard transcript of a debate in 1998.
> But the figures seemed fairly stable over the elections it was reported for
> so there's no reason to believe it will have changed significantly since.
>
> Obviously, not all of those will be actual personation; in some cases it may
> well be simple error on the part of either the voter or the poll clerk (eg,
> a miscommunication as to the voter's name and address leading to the wrong
> elector being ticked off on the list). But it's almost impossible to know
> that for certain in most cases. Plus, of course, a tendered ballot will only
> hapen if the right person does actually turn up to vote, which not all do.
> So the number of tendered ballots understates the number of incorrect votes.

Does that include things like someone requesting a postal vote but
changing their mind and voting in person? Obviously in places where
lots of people share common surnames, inadvertantly crossing the wrong
name off the list is a risk. I imagine there are polling stations in
Wales where a non trivial portion of the electorate have surnames like
"Thomas".

On 08.03.23 22:02, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 08/03/2023 20:56, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:34:29 +0000, Graeme Wall
>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/03/2023 01:19, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 09:29:12 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 08:53:17 +0000
>>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/03/2023 02:23, Charles Ellson wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 09:26:52 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Those who don't vote don't count; those who tell you to FOAMYOB
>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>> vote either way. There is also the aspect that the only poll which
>>>>>>> counts is the one which all voters have the opportunity to attend,
>>>>>>> something which only the Westminster government has been actively
>>>>>>> trying to prevent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes.  Voter suppression is something the UK conservatives have in
>>>>>> common
>>>>>> with the US Republicans.  Both has their roots in racism.
>>>>>
>>>>> Racism? Thats a new one. Are the scots a seperate race from the
>>>>> english then?
>>>>> I suspect genealogists (not to mention geneticists) would disagree.
>>>>>
>>>> Legally Scots are a different race, just as the English are a
>>>> different race from 'Merkans.
>>> Neither of those statements is true.
>>>
>> You need to tell the courts on both sides of the border.
>
> There is no concept of race, just nationality.

There is no universal definition of "race" within Engish (or, I assume,
Scottish) law, but there are specific laws that relate to "race" for
specific purposes, and the definitions are not always consistent. For
example what might be regarded as a group identity that can form the
basis for a racially motivated hate crime might not be regarded as a
group identity that qualifies for employment discrimination, or for
identities that you migth include on the census.

Robin

On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 13:38:09 +0000, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>> I'm surprised the use of camera-phones is permitted at the count.
>
>Why? I'm allowed to wander around with a TV camera, there are usually
>stills guys, at least from the local press, around as well. Each party
>involved in the election has observers there and the returning officer
>and his assistants are there to oversee everything. The general public
>are allowed to watch the count. On top of that there will be a police
>presence.
>
>All the votes are, by definition, anonymous, so there are no privacy
>problems. At no point in the proceedings, from polling station to count,
>are any of the boxes solely in the custody of a single person.

They are round here. How do you think the ballot boxes get from remote
rural polling stations to the count? They go in the boot of the
presiding officer's car. There is a seal, though, which is expected to
still be present until the box is opened as the first stage of the
count.