Requirements for voter identification brought in by the previous UK Government should be scrapped, Holyrood’s Minister for Parliamentary Business has said.
Jamie Hepburn has highlighted evidence from the Electoral Commission that the new requirements kept potential voters away from the ballot box at the recent UK Parliamentary election, and fears misunderstanding around the need for ID could have a similar impact in Scotland.
In a letter to Rushanara Ali MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government), he asked for the UK Government to consider scrapping voter ID requirements.
‘our research shows that the need for ID discouraged some people from voting‘
Almost everyone who attended a polling station at the July 2024 UK general election was able to vote, according to a new report on the implementation of voter ID from the Electoral Commission.
0.09% of people who tried to vote at a polling station in Scotland, where the requirement was in place nationally for the first time, were unable to do so because they did not present an accepted form of ID.
The data, collected by polling station staff, suggests that around 1,400 people in Scotland were unable to vote in July due to the requirement, equating to about 1 in every 1,100 in-person voters.
Commission research carried out by YouGov found high levels of awareness, with 90% of people in Scotland aware of the requirement following a widespread public information campaign ahead of the election. This was slightly higher than awareness in Wales (89%), England (87%), and Northern Ireland (89%), where the requirement has been in place since 2003.
However, public opinion research carried out for the Commission found that around 5% of people who did not vote at the general election in Scotland said their decision was related to the voter ID requirement, suggesting that the requirement is putting off some people from voting.
The Commission is therefore recommending changes to make it easier for those who do not already have ID to vote. The UK Government should:
Review the list of accepted ID to identify any additional documents that could be added, such as the Jobcentre Plus Travel Discount Card and the 18+ Student Oyster photocard, in addition to the Veterans card.
Undertake and publish a review of the Voter Authority Certificate and consider whether it could be issued digitally to encourage greater take up.
Enable registered voters who do have accepted ID to make an attestation at their polling station on behalf of someone who does not have accepted ID – known as ‘vouching’.
Andy O’Neill, Head of Electoral Commission Scotland, said:“This was the first time that voters across Scotland were required to show photographic ID to vote at a polling station, and the data shows almost everyone was able to do so successfully. However, our research shows that the need for ID discouraged some people from voting – and we don’t want to see any voters lose their say.
“Public awareness of the need for voter ID is high in Scotland, but there are still groups of voters that are less likely to be aware of the need to show ID or that do not have an accepted form.
“Everyone eligible should have the opportunity to vote, which is why we are recommending changes that will support those who do not currently have ID and improve the accessibility of elections, while maintaining the security of the process.
“The Commission will review how our public campaigns and other work can continue to support the effective implementation of voter ID and minimise the barriers to voting.”
The Commission’s independent analysis, compiling polling station data and public opinion research from across Scotland, found:
0.24% of people who went to vote at a polling station were initially turned away, but two thirds of these people returned later in the day and were able to vote. The remaining 0.09% did not return and did not vote.
90% of people were aware of the voter ID policy, though awareness was lower amongst young people (83%), and people from ethnic minority communities (79%).
57% of people said they were aware they could apply for a Voter Authority Certificate if they did not have an accepted form of ID.
11,356 people applied for a Voter Authority Certificate between January 2023, when the service first launched, and 26 June 2024, the application deadline for the UK general election. Applications were lower than expected with only 7,716 being submitted between the election being called and the deadline. Around 4,552 certificates were used as a form of ID on 4 July.
The evidence suggests that the requirement affected some people more than others. People from lower social grades who did not vote were more likely to say it was because they did not have any accepted ID than those in a higher social grade.
The Commission will continue to monitor which groups are less likely to have access to the required proof of ID and assess how our campaign activity can best reach these groups.
The city council is issuing guidance so everyone is able to cast their vote in the General Election on 4 July.
If you applied for a postal vote by 7 June, then this has been posted out and should arrive soon if you haven’t already received it. If you applied for one between 8-19 June it will be sent out by this weekend. Further information can be found on our website.
Please fill your postal vote in as soon as possible once you receive it and post it back to us.
When filling out your postal vote if you’ve separated the statement from envelope A this isn’t an issue, please just send everything back. Don’t worry about using blue ink.
If you need a proxy vote, where someone votes on your behalf, the deadline for new applications is tomorrow (26 June) at 5pm. Guidance on proxy votes is available on our website.
If you are going to vote in person, this is the first UK General Election where voters must show a form of photo identification (ID) to cast their ballot.
The Knowledge Transfer Programme will look at new ways to identify voters
Edinburgh Napier University and Democracy Counts, a company which runs elections around the world, are teaming up in a joint effort to give people more trust in their voting systems in the digital age.
The University’s Blockpass ID Lab will work with the firm over two years as part of a new Knowledge Transfer Programme, funded by Innovate UK.
While many electoral operators still rely on paper and pen to recognise voters, the partnership will look at developing new ways of identifying citizens, while keeping their personal information safe.
It is hoped that this will make elections more secure, transparent and reliable in future.
Professor Bill Buchanan OBE, who leads the Blockpass ID Lab at Edinburgh Napier University, said: “This collaboration will bring forward new methods, using our expertise in advanced cryptography, to properly identify voters at each of the key stages of an election.
“We will aim to replace our paper-based signatures with a more reliable and trustworthy digital approach. Through advancements like this, and digital wallets, we hope to provide more convenient and accessible ways for citizens to take part in the democratic process.”
Simon Verdon, CEO of Democracy Counts, said: “We run elections around the world, and each one differs in their scope and implementation.
“This collaboration will allow us to build the next generation of trusted voter registration and election systems which can integrate different levels of digital trust, and should make voting more transparent, more resilient, and more trustworthy.
“The opportunity is thus for the UK to continue to be an international leader in the setup of elections.”
Paul Keating, Technical Director of Democracy Counts, said: “Digital trust plays an ever-increasing role in our lives, especially as we move towards digital signing.
“As elections have to have high levels of trust and transparency, this work will bring forward the current state-of-the-art in digital trust.
“But there are challenges around using citizen data, and so the collaboration will bring forward the latest research in the preservation of privacy and make sure it has high levels of trust from citizens.”
Established in 2009, Democracy Counts is a market-leading provider of electoral management software, support services and training to the UK Government and local authorities across Scotland, England and Wales – as well as managed referendums and ballot services to public, private and community organisations.
Edinburgh Napier University’s Blockpass ID Lab has spent the last five years researching ways in which blockchain technology can protect personal data from online scammers and hackers.
Expanding candidacy rights to 16 and 17 year olds is one of a number of electoral reforms being considered in a consultation launched today.
Following the lowering of the voting age to 16 in devolved Scottish elections, the consultation asks about changing the age of candidacy from the current minimum of 18 to allow young people to stand for election.
Views are also being sought on how best to encourage all those eligible to register to vote, especially among under-represented groups and on measures to protect the privacy of candidates addresses.
Other proposals in the consultation include extending candidacy rights to foreign nationals who already have the right to vote, and measures to improve the accessibility of voting, including for voters with sight loss.
Minister for Parliamentary Business George Adam said: “A robust electoral system is fundamental to the success of Scotland being an inclusive and vibrant democracy that makes everyone feel included and empowered.
“It is important as many people in our society as possible feel they have an effective and independent means to hold government to account and also feel encouraged take an active interest in politics and civic life.
“The measures set out in this consultation are wide-ranging and include key questions on how best to improve the accessibility of elections and to promote electoral registration. We will consider all responses very carefully before deciding on our next steps.”
On 5th September, the Conservative party elected a new prime minister of the United Kingdom. Scotland has not voted for a conservative government since 1955, and Liz Truss marks the twelfth prime minister in the last hundred years elected without majority support in Scotland (writes Fraser of Allander Institute’s ALLISON CATALANO).
The last time Scotland’s vote mirrored the majority was in 2005 – the last time that a general election resulted in a Labour majority.
The Brexit vote in 2016 is another good example of how far Scotland’s opinion differs from that of the UK majority – less than 40% of Scottish voters approved the referendum to leave the EU, compared to more than 50% from Wales and England.
Scotland’s status as a minority among the UK electorate isn’t so surprising from a population standpoint – Scotland only accounts for about 9% of the total UK electorate. England, by contrast, claims 84% of all voters.
The vast difference between Scotland’s opinion and UK electoral outcomes may result in worsened well-being for the Scottish population. People derive a sense of satisfaction from having the ability to participate in and impact politics and governmental structures. This satisfaction, termed “democratic well-being,” is weakened by perceived or structural inequalities.
Participatory inequality stems from any situation in which a particular group is unlikely to or discouraged from some form of civic participation, which includes behaviours like voting, interacting with political campaigns, activism, or volunteering.
Examining voting in particular, Scottish voters may feel disenfranchised from the political sphere in the UK because of the perceived lack of political power on a national level, and may be less likely to choose to vote or express an interest in politics.
Certain groups in Scotland may also be more or less inclined to participate in national or local elections.
Income levels, health, and educational attainment may all result in different levels of participation both within Scotland and when comparing Scottish participation to the rest of the UK. In this sense, there may be participatory inequalities within the Scottish population and when comparing Scotland to the UK as a whole.
Using Understanding Society: the UK Longitudinal Household Survey, we determined that age, income, health, education, and employment statuses are correlated with an individual’s level of interest in politics, and the likelihood that they voted or volunteered recently. Understanding Society is a yearly panel survey, with yearly data available from 2009 to 2021.
Does participation differ in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK?
Scotland has a high level of average engagement across all survey years relative to Northern Ireland and Wales, but a lower level than England.
Scottish residents are more likelyto have volunteered in the past year than residents of Northern Ireland or Wales, but less likely to have volunteered than English residents.
Scottish voting habits vary. Scotland had the lowest turnout in 2001 and 2005, and the highest turnout in 2015 and 2019. Scotland generally has higher turnout than Northern Ireland but lower turnout than England or Wales (Figure 1).
Scottish residents are more likely to express aninterest in politics than in Wales and Northern Ireland. Scotland’s responses are roughly similar to England. Interest in politics across the UK increased in 2016 following the EU referendum vote, particularly in Northern Ireland, and peaked in Scotland in 2018 (Figure 2).
Figure 1: General election voter participation by constituent country
Figure 2: Interest in politics by constituent country
Despite Scottish residents being relatively politically engaged, Scotland experiences substantial gaps in participation based on health, income, education, and employment.
Scotland has the largest gap in participation between individuals that considered themselves in good health and individuals that considered themselves in poor health in the United Kingdom (Figure 3).
The lowest income quintile in Scotland is more engaged than the lowest income quintile in Wales or Northern Ireland. However, Scotland experiences larger gaps between the highest and lowest income quintile than the national average in political interest. Notably, the bottom income quintile in Scotland was more likely to have voted than in any other part of the UK. Political interest was also higher than the national average for the lowest earners.
Individuals with no qualifications in Scotland are less likely to volunteer than anywhere else in the UK, although they are more likely to have voted in a general election than the UK average. Unqualified individuals in Scotland are less likely to express an interest in politics than in England or Wales.
Scotland experiences a greater gap in participation based on work-related benefits compared to the rest of the UK. Individuals receiving in-work income or unemployment benefits are less likely to have voted, volunteer, or express a political interest in Scotland than anywhere else in Great Britain.
Figure 3: The gap in civic participation between self-reported good health and bad health is wider for each behaviour in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK
How do inequalities impact civic engagement in Scotland?
Health and income inequality are consistent predictors of voter turnout in Scotland. Scotland’s wide range of participatory behaviour based on health is particularly interesting.
Scotland has a unique relationship with health inequalities, and a history of unusually poor health outcomes based on region, education, and income. Although health inequality takes many forms, life expectancies provide a good frame of reference.
In general, higher incomes beget longer lives. Scotland is a complete anomaly in this regard – despite having the highest average income in the United Kingdom, Scottish people have the shortest life expectancy.
Life expectancies also vary widely within Scotland, and even within cities and neighbourhoods. For instance, a male born in Glasgow between 2018-2020 has a life expectancy that is 7.5 years shorter than one born in the Shetland Islands.
Within Glasgow neighbourhoods, the difference in life expectancies is striking – males born in the least deprived areas can expect to live 15 years longer than males born in the most deprived areas.
I examined the health impacts on voting, volunteering, and political interest based on individual’s self-perceived general health, mental health, long-term illness or disability, and receipt of any illness or disability benefits.
Individuals that consider themselves in poor health are less likely to engage in civic behaviour compared to those that considered themselves in generally good health (Figure 4). Overall, self-perceived general health was the most significant health predictor of civic behaviour.
Figure 4: Inequalities in civic participation by self-reported health status
Surprisingly, claiming a long-term illness or disability did not impact an individual’s ability to participate. This is largely because of the broadness of the term “disability” – a person can be disabled in a way that limits their ability to vote, but many disabilities are easier to manage and would have no impact on someone’s ability to understand politics or volunteer. Receiving disability benefits, however, indicates that a person’s circumstance is difficult enough that it interferes with regular work and income.
The Understanding Society Survey has 41 different benefit classifications. Using their descriptions as illness or disability benefits, I looked into people who received at least one of the following benefits: severe disablement allowance, industrial industry disablement allowance, disability living allowance, war disablement pension, incapacity benefit, received working tax credit (including disabled person’s tax credit), and any other disability benefit or payment.
Scottish residents receiving some form of disability benefit were:
10% less likely to have voted in the most recent election than Scottish residents that did not receive disability benefits
19% less likely to report an interest in politics
41% less likely to have volunteered in the past year
Receiving work or income benefits is another way of looking into the degree to which income inequality affects participation. I considered the following benefit classifications to be low income or unemployment benefits: income support, job seeker’s allowance, national insurance credit, housing benefit, rent rebate, universal credit.
Receiving work or income benefits affected participation more substantially than those receiving disability benefits (Table 1).
Table 1: Proportion of each population which participated in the following civic behaviours
Voted in a recent election
Interested in politics
Volunteered in the past year
Receiving unemployment or income benefits
66%
20%
8%
Receiving illness or disability benefits
72%
26%
10%
Total Scottish population
80%
32%
17%
Income inequality is also closely related to civic participation. By dividing household income into five quartiles of the population, we found that the highest-earning 20% of the Scottish population was significantly more likely to participate in civic behaviours (Figure 5). This is a clear example of participatory inequalities based on income.
Figure 5: Civic participation inequalities based on income quintile
Education also has a significant impact on all aspects of civic participation. Volunteering is the most notably impacted behaviour by education; only 4.4% of Scottish residents without educational qualifications reported volunteering in the past year, compared to over 27% of Scots with university degrees.
Table 2: Percentage of each population which participated in the following civic behaviours
Voted in a recent election
Interested in politics
Volunteered in the past year
No educational qualifications
73.5%
21.3%
4.4%
Scottish average
80%
32%
17%
Has a university degree
87.6%
38.4%
27.1%
Scotland suffers from unequal participation across a number of metrics, most notably education, income, health, and benefit receipt status. Poorer, less educated, and less healthy Scottish residents are less likely to have participated in voting and volunteering. The differences in participation are also larger within Scotland than any other constituent country in the United Kingdom.
Civic participation – whether by voting or by selecting causes to volunteer for – ultimately shapes political agendas. Values that are important to low-income, unqualified, or unhealthy members of society may be overlooked on a national scale due to disproportionately low levels of participation among these individuals.
The more equality in participation among all levels of society, the more that any particular group is able to better their circumstances.
Edinburgh’s count this year will take place over two days at the Royal Highland Centre, Ingliston. It gets underway at 9am this morning.
Throughout the planning process, our elections team has sought guidance from public health experts, consulting extensively with the Director of Public Health, to make sure the event runs as safely and as smoothly as possible.
Today (Friday 7 May) the results for Edinburgh Central, Edinburgh Southern and Edinburgh Western will be announced, while results will be declared for Edinburgh Eastern, Edinburgh Pentlands and Edinburgh Northern and Leith as well as the list/Region vote results tomorrow, Saturday 8 May.
Safety measures in place at the count
Everyone must wear a face covering when moving and circulating within the count venue, unless they are exempt.
Hand sanitising stations will be positioned throughout the venue.
Physical distancing will be in place.
Regular cleaning, including at touch points.
Contact tracing system with all people attending the count.
One-way systems in parts of the building.
Room capacity limits will be in place.
Enhanced ventilation at the venue.
Andrew Kerr, Chief Executive of the City of Edinburgh Council and Returning Officer for the Edinburgh constituencies and the Lothian Region, said: The arrangements for the 2021 Scottish Parliamentary Election feel very different from previous elections.
“Throughout our preparations our elections team has sought guidance from public health experts and we’ve put in place extensive additional Covid-19 health and safety measures to help keep everyone safe, reduce the risk of spreading the virus and of course protect the integrity of the Election.
“We’re taking all the necessary steps to support the COVID-safe operation of the election count at the Highland Hall. In line with Public Health Scotland (PHS) guidance every effort has been made to make sure the centre is well ventilated, hand-sanitising stations are positioned throughout the venue, facemasks are worn whenever people move about the venue and that everyone observes two-metre physical distancing at all times.
“Count assistants will adhere to two-metre distancing but don’t have to wear a face covering when seated on the count floor.
“The safety of everyone working at the count is of utmost importance and measures will be enforced by our marshalls throughout the duration of the event for the health and safety of everyone present. I want to thank the team for their efforts so far and look forward to delivering a robust process in these unprecedented times.”
The results from the count will be tweeted live from @Edinburgh_cc as they are announced by the Returning Officer, with the hashtag #SPE21RESULT.
Because of COVID-19, there will be safety measures in place at polling stations to help you vote safely (for example, a one-way system or restrictions on the number of people allowed in).
If you choose to vote in person, make sure you:
wear a face covering (unless you’re exempt)
bring your own pen or pencil (there will be clean pencils available at the polling station if you forget to bring your own)
use the hand sanitiser provided when entering and leaving the polling station
