Questions remain about the impact of introducing voter identification for May’s local elections, the Labour chairman of the Commons’ Levelling Up committee has said.
Clive Betts, who chairs the Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Committee, said the elections watchdog must reveal whether requiring voter ID discouraged people from casting their ballot.
May’s local elections were the first time voters in Great Britain were required to show ID before collecting their ballot paper.
Passports, driving licences and blue badges were among the IDs permitted, as were the free certificates that could be applied for ahead of the vote.
But the move was widely criticised amid concerns about voter disenfranchisement.
The Electoral Commission is expected to publish its initial analysis of the rollout of voter ID this month.
Mr Betts told the PA News Agency: “The questions are – did it prevent or deter people from voting who otherwise would have voted? And was the impact different among different parts of the electorate?
“Different people in different circumstances, did they react differently to the restrictions that were put on them?”
The committee chair added: ““We are going to have the Electoral Commission give evidence and ask them questions about what they found and what they are recommending, because in the end the Electoral Commission has a responsibility to make sure voting is fair and transparent but also to make sure that people are encouraged to vote, not discouraged.”
Figures collected by PA from 95% of councils that held elections last month suggest nearly 34,900 people were turned away from polling stations for not having the correct identification, of which more than 21,600 returned later with the right ID and were able to vote.
This leaves just over 13,200 people who did not return and who therefore did not cast a vote.
Mr Betts has previously raised concerns about the methods used to alert people they needed to bring ID to cast their vote.
While clerks at all polling stations were told to remind voters to show their ID, in some areas, greeters at the door also carried out the task.
Mr Betts told PA: “What the Electoral Commission said to us was they would only take the figures from those polling stations where there was no one who was pre-screened before people actually got to the clerks.
“The problem with that of course is that councils tended to use pre-screening at the busiest polling stations, and they may be ones, say, in particularly built up areas with high concentrations of different types of the electorate.”
Mr Betts said the picture in his Sheffield South East constituency had been “varied”, adding: “Certainly in my own constituency, many of the polling stations said virtually nobody turned up without ID.
“In another, 13 women from the Pakistani community were all turned away.
“I think there is some evidence that perhaps people from the BME community were less aware of the need or hadn’t got easy access to the particular requirements.”
He also called on the Government to learn from the rollout of voter ID, and introduce more valid identification documents for younger people.
The senior Labour MP said: “I think it particularly applies to young people. I think the likelihood is that it could be a much bigger challenge around the general election, because we know at local elections the turnout is lower, and proportionally fewer young people vote at local elections.
“I think you will just see enormous problems unless you expand the voter ID potential to more forms of ID for young people at the general election.”
Following the May elections, the Electoral Commission said its initial assessment was that the polls were “well run”, but it added it would carry out further work to assess the impact of voter ID.
An Electoral Commission spokesman said: “We already know from our research that the ID requirement posed a greater challenge for some groups in society, and that some people were regrettably unable to vote today as a result.
“It will be essential to understand the extent of this impact, and the reasons behind it, before a final view can be taken on how the policy has worked in practice and what can be learnt for future elections.”
